Hey @oldtimer,
1A1V means that rewards would be distributed based on the number of votes rather than the value of single votes.
That's why it's so important for Oracles to make sure that 1 Account is actually one user and not 10 accounts are 1 user.
The problem with this system is that then it becomes about feeding the mainstream masses what they want and manipulate the rankings like that. Just the way politics work. The current voting system is more aristocratic and generates way higher quality content. If you want the rankings be ruled by the average low invested person you will see lower quality. Money generates more incentive to create massive quality content. It puts more responsibility on the user.
i agree. i personally don't like the idea of hivemind. i see it degenerating into a popularity contest. what kind of behavior will that incentivize?!
You are right. It then becomes about how you can play with people's brain to click like.
That's why it's so important for Oracles to make sure that 1 Account is actually one user and not 10 accounts are 1 user.
What's their incentive to do it?
The alternative is to authorize their own bot swarms as a legitimate users and make profit from them?
It makes sense, but the question is the same.
In Venezuela, you'll need 100K votes for a monthly salary and in Canada 100M.
Imagine if 500M Chinese people sign up and start posting in their language and upvote their own people's posts.
Don't get me wrong, please.
I'm aware current state is bad but I'm not sure about your proposal.
With all due respect @oldtimer this is a bit of a strawman concern. It's the equivalent of the one I've heard before.
What if CNN buys 20 million Steem and starts censoring anything fringe.
I understand what you mean, I'm not dismissing it, it's not impossible, its just highly improbable.
And because I don't want to come off as someone who is just spouting assertions without any type of backing.
Dunbar theory proposes that the an efficient social network maxes out at 150 people. From this number we have to assume collaboration, specially to this rank is fractionary. It would be difficult to imagine 150 coinciding on what to contribute towards at all times. And, since humans can't seem to care enough about people outside of the tolerance of 150, the network effect is capped in two fronts.
In other words. Imagining that millions of people can come together and collaborate at a macro sense almost goes against our nature, and we have no anecdotal evidence to prove it either.
To be a bit ridiculous (i apologize, its how i talk) we would have solved world hunger if we had that range of empathy and that selfless capacity for collaboration.
You don't need to apologize. I just want to spur the conversation.
Most of the time simple six-pack joe's logic is better than all theories.
And it's not censoring I'm worried about.
With 500M accounts, I mentioned in my comment above, we can expect a lot of good recipes on how to perfect grill the dog on BBQ on the hot page and even on trending.
I use to live in a socialism for 30 years and believe me. It doesn't work. Tested.
You are right. Socialism and Communism leads to the same shit system. The only sane system is an aristocratic rule system where people highly invested makes the big decisions. But a system that also allows people to grow and rise up to a high position of responsibility. That is impossible in a socialist/communist system. There is no top. There is then also no real empowerment for a human.
Hahahaha Hot dog recipes trending... I hear you. On the other hand, quality is very much subjective. I left a huge comment on Bernie's post regarding my opinion on this matter.
I mean, I don't want to come off as elitist, but for me cat pictures and hotdogs are not part of my content diet. Meaning, that when I'm of the idea of learning something new, a new theory, philosophy, or what have you, the last thing that will distract me is such content.
However, I'm sympathetic to the fact that for many people their cat is the most precious thing in the world and they need to have hundreds of pictures of it.
I think my idea of "quality content" that is, well written articles in all the fields that I enjoy will probably sprout as an offshoot of Steem. Possibly an SMT with that niche in mind.
But when it comes to mass adoption, its reasonable to think that we will do better with BBQ pictures and alike.
Let's say for every one guy who enjoys deep thought, there are thousands of six-pack joes. And both are equally important.
Agree.
For me, this place is to complex and I don't even try to understand how it works.
Thinking about how to change it? No way.
I never waste my time on things I can't change.
But that's just me.
I'm sure a lot of smart people are on the steemit. But even if we figure out what to do we have 21 witnesses to agree upon and confirm the changes.
If not, the ship will sink.
Content creators would still enjoy be on STEEM Blockchain at $0 cost since it's still better than toxic YouTube/Facebook/Instagram community haha.