I have no insider information or birdie telling me so this is just speculation.
Perhaps Dan is referring to Steemit meaning the corporation and not the blockchain. Dan has to know the difference between the two.
I might be wrong but Dan seems more like a builder rather than a destroyer. My guess is there could be some type of integration. The UBI idea does make sense as a way to attract users.
There are reasons why I think a Universal Basic Income would be useful. However, there have been no real world demonstrations of it working. I think, if they are willing to take the risk, we should stand back and watch.
Some of the problems UBI would resolve are liquidity traps and disenfranchisement.
I think that if EOS is willing to undertake the experiment, it would be beneficial for everybody to have a dataset that demonstrates if UBI is workable or not.
I am of two minds on one person one vote. Democracy is two wolves and a sheep voting what is for lunch. Stake is wealthy wolves and a poor sheep deciding what is for lunch based on assets. However, as an aspiring wealthy wolf, I have incentive to build my stake. As a pure democracy, one person one vote, I’d be continuously suspicious of my peers. In one, I have an opportunity to become elite. In the other, I’m at the whim of the mob.
You bring up valid points about the one person, one vote. Neither system is ideal although a blend of the two might be the best.
Posted with 