It does seem to me though like there is an obvious vulnerability here, which is money. If someone has a lot of money, then they could potentially do whatever they want. If a terrorist organization powered up 2 million in Steem, then started posting videos of them decapitating reporters, what could anyone do? Regular users flagging them would be like throwing rice at a tank, and while I'm sure whales would flag them, I think most whales here are primarily interested in profit, so getting into a war with another huge whale is not desirable.@andrarchy
I think it might be too simplistic of an answer to say, everyone is free to power up more steem, as in the real world obviously money is a finite resource and some have millions of times more than others.
This is actually something I thought about a long time ago once I initially wrapped my head around the system here. Back then I thought if Steem ever did become a threat to major Social networks, could they not just create accounts with huge wallets and flood the system with kiddy porn, that they then upvote to everyone's eyes? I mean, realistically I doubt they're that sinister, but the question remains is that a possibility? Because if it is I think it would be good to have the conversation about a defense against that before it enters the realm of plausibility.
Maybe the extreme examples I'm using here violate laws so they'd be okay to remove in a centralized way? Or would people just have to deal with that, because I imagine it would be catastrophic.
Setting aside these extreme examples, if say the KKK, since they're an organized group, just put out a mandate for all their members to start powering up Steem, and they collectively amassed a few million in SP, would they be able to hijack Steem as their own platform?
Please @andrarchy I’ve been visiting this particular comment repeatedly to see your reply, please this comment indeed demands for a reply.
That's a horrible answer... that answer is exactly why Facebook, twitter and all are going to fail.
They had people with "ethics" determining what should be hidden from people.
Yes, lets start with those racist KKK members, then lets get rid of those deplorable people that have an opposing political belief, once the precedent is set and the capacity to do so is proven... then it's just the decision of who to block.
First, this playing dumb trying to look smart, Ive never understood the goal with that. Seriously, 3 sentences, only 1 was compound and you struggle?? Not a good look man.
If you want a club that is exclusive, make it as exclusive as you want. If you are calling yourself an open and censorship resistant platform, then no. UNLESS they are accepting responsibility for every crime that occurs, because then they vecome publishers who are responsible for the published content.
BTW - the examples you mention really cross the boundary into criminal activity, and cutting out that content and presenting it and related evidence to authorities is completely justified. You really should have throught through your position, because i just pointed out the effects that this would cause.
Facebook and Twitter, they are dancing on that head of the pin, claiming to be an open platform BUT wanting to maintain the privileges that come with being publishers. And they BOTH have FAR WORSE to face if they are determined to be publishers. You are treating this as final while they are still in the process of committing the crimes, not yet at the point where these actions face a legal determination. (The cases that have occurred DO NOT favor your position)
I didn't attack your character, YOU made the decision to pretend like 2 simple sentences and a compound sentence was confusing, yet you now expect me to believe you understand the legal issues at play??
I've seriously never understood the intent of that tactic you tried, it's never worked, and even if you came out and quoted laws to back up your position, I'm still left with the mentality that "hey, how is this guy legal expert when he barely grasped the grammar?"
Edit: Re-read your first response to me where you directly attacked my character, I point out your tactic to play dumb trying to look smart, and you start crying....
It's exactly a demonstration why people that want censorship are far too child-like to make those types of determinations. We end up with this type of faggotry.