- There is no way to avoid bots. Anything a human can do, a bot can do.
- 1 vote = 1 vote means you'll have a massive Sybil attack on your hands. The votes being weight by stake is really important. If you don't understand that and how it impacts the game theory dynamics of the system here, then you're talking confidently about something you're not familiar with.
- Getting rid of SBD is also not something we can easily do at this point. Talk with some of the core developers and those who have been here for a while to understand why.
You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
I appreciate you raising this issue for discussion and doing it in a civilized way, unlike what has been going on the last couple of weeks. I also appreciate you addressing my comment.
You're right. I don't understand but that is precisely my point. I have been a user for about 8 months and I don't understand how the system works. Sure that's on me but it is not a simple system. If the platform seeks to attain mass adoption, this will be a barrier, as will the fact that if you do not have a strong grasp of how it works and the financial means to act on that, the platform will not deliver on its promise.
I expect that this issue will become worse as the platform gains users. We will see more armies of whale bots feasting on minnows for their own financial gain. The most powerful users will be those who have no interest in advancing the community.
This isn't something I am interested in engaging in. I will continue to visit for some specific content, and I will invest in Steem by buying and selling on exchanges, but the last thing I will ever do is invest in the platform by powering up.
By the way, my comments were intended less as advice for changes to the system than they were pointing out what I see as the problems that will ultimately prevent it from reaching its goals.
Best metaphor for Steemit yet.
Thanks!
And what about limiting the amount of SP votes from whales to one account together with limiting votes from delegated power?
Dramatically reducing the number of bots is the goal, not perfection. Very expensive effort is required to defeat nominal bottraps. This has been shown widely. Captchas and 2FA are widely used because they largely work.
Also, there are things people do that bots can't. No one on Steemit, to my knowledge, has ever even tried to cut bots.
They're too profitable.
Sure, if you leave bots in place. Sort of a self-fulfilling prophecy then. Given that ~30% of SP supports the witnesses, and that but 2/3 of the top 20 are needed to fork, that's not a great expense to just buy the VP to own the witnesses.
That's not a Sybil attack. It's a bargain.
What really matters to Steemit is rewards for content. Were the gaming that produces all the distortions through bots and curation rewards obviated, retention might crack 10%.
I bet it's getting worse, instead. I've read estimates as low as 8%. Those algos aren't gonna do a bit of good on a dead platform.
Either the Steem gets more broadly distributed, or nothing will fix retention.
Losing bots, egalitarian voting, or at worst a Huey Long style 3% -300% VP, and ending curation, would leave all the whales their mined stakes, and those stakes might become of lasting value on a platform that kept it's users posting and upvoting.
No one would benefit more from a rising Steem price. Nothing less is going to raise it in the long term.
How does one get a core developers ear?
Read the real discussions in the github. Develop an understanding of the actual arguments and issues before weighing in. Then when you have something to contribute, its value speaks for itself and you gradually gain traction and respect.
Thank you