You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
RE: Blockchain Update 3: Hardfork 20 and Release 19.4 – AppBase, StatsD, and RocksDB
Awesome changes! I really like the cooldown for flags 12 hours before payout.
Btw, will the self-vote curation be changed to start at 15 minutes like previously discussed?
All in all, great work Steemit team!
The issue for that (along with quite a few others not mentioned in the post) is still listed in the HF20 project: https://github.com/steemit/steem/issues/1878
Looking forward to this. These forks are one reason why Steem outperforms all other decentralized networks on the planet. In my humble opinion.
Not judging by user retention it doesn't:
Snapchat has a retention rate of ~30%.
Instagram has a retention rate of ~39%
Facebook has a retention rate of ~69%
Steemit's retention rate is an embarrassing 13%.
My suggestion, which will be roundly ignored I'm sure, is to boot every single bot off this place - make "institutional" tools that handle spam and duping external content, and decouple the relationship between vote power and how many tokens one holds.
Otherwise, you just have a microcosm of the "outside world" where the deepest pockets win, and the little guy/gal just goes away.
But I'm sure they'll keep shuffling the deck chairs until there are no more users to care.
The platform is still young. Changes are being worked on to improve a lot of the issues that people have. Also, your comment is technically not relevant to @gray00's. He/she said "decentralized networks on the planet". None of the websites you cited are decentralized. Are there any blockchain social media sites that are beating Steem?
If Steemit can't keep people around, then what is the point?
A "perfect" system populated by bots?
The bots have been here since the beginning of the platform. Sites like Reddit have a lot of activity from bots too. Finding a way for bots and humans to co-exist should be part of the thought process, because it will never be possible to eliminate bots. They can also provide a lot of value too, depending on their programmed purpose.
Which is precisely why I said there should be basic functions provided by Steemit platform-enabled services.
The rest tend to be the kind designed to "game" the reward pool, and it isn't helping.
The dismal retention rate is proof of that.
I’m open to discussing ideas. Do you have any suggestions for changes?
Snapchat, Instagram, Facebook isnt decentralized.
Comparing Steemit to current mainstream social media platform is as unfair as comparing a horse to the first gasoline powered prototype automobile in the 1800s.. The horse wins, sure, early 1800s cars are shit. But no one is using horses on the AutoBahn today.
I have a feeling you don't understand what the Steem blockchain stands for and what it actually aims to achieve, It's more than just "content platform that pays users". "Institutionalization" is exactly what the steem blockchain is fighting against. "decoupling the relationship between vote power and how many tokens one holds" goes against stake-weighted voting that is the whole point of the steem blockchain.
Perhaps when SMTs come out people can issue SMT that works on 1A1V/ABV as there is use for such methods of voting. But the base layer steem reward distribution has to be stake-weighted to work. A spam account's vote cannot worth the same as an account of a person who worked and invested on the platform for years.
I disagree. Rewarding creators and curators is a completely separate issue from basing rewards on stake, and Steem, from my read of the white paper, was not intended to duplicate the issues stake weighting imposed on societies throughout history, but to revolutionize how economic rewards impacted society, using Steemit as a microcosm.
Indeed, as @ned has repeatedly pointed out recently, this is precisely one of the purposes of SMTs, as combining them with oracles and communities enables stake weighting to be avoided as it was not for Steem itself.
I expect that the user retention rate is a reflection of how unsatisfactory many have found stake weighting on Steemit. For the cohort of which I am a member, joining in May 2017, the retention rate is about half the 13% figure named, actually about 7.5% YOY.
I expect that communities that emphasize stake weighting will have even lower retention rates when alternatives become available, as they have not yet on Steemit.
The real point of censorship resistance is to empower society to reflect actual facts in their posts and comments, and pandering to stake is inherently degrading. The preferability of alternatives will be quickly revealed, and communities will thrive or fail as a result of their recognition of the vastly higher value of honest and factual creations to society than those merely better funded.
While the several social media platforms earlier mentioned weren't decentralized, few users of social media have much idea what effect decentralization has yet. The abysmal retention rate of Steemit in comparison reflects the satisfaction of users based on the metrics they find compelling, and the absence of stake weighting is possibly a significant factor, despite the utter lack of earnings on other platforms most users are availed that are potential on Steemit.
The 7.5% retention rate was calculated by @paulag, and you can verify the validity by checking out her blog, which I highly recommend.
You gave me alot to think about. Perhaps the emphasis on stake-weighted voting needs changing. I dont know for sure what is the best way to go about it.
But I can think of one problem if stakes on the blockchain are removed, specifically what then would incentivize users to gather steem and hold them as a Store of Value? You can surely agree that if there were no incentive to hold on to steem, every creators would drive views and clicks (possibly using click-farms) to their posts, get payout and immediately cashout.
As for user retention, tbh by now i can't quite care less (or perhaps i've changed my stance on "user retention/acquisition") because more than likely those who came here for quick profit alone came here for the wrong reasons and they will be the ones that leave here. You can call it maximalism, elitism whatever. But tbh i dont think we're ready for full mass adoption yet.
I don't think the steem blockchain will be the only blockchain that is relevant to the content web. Maybe another competitor will soon rise and rival against Steem's stake-based voting? Only the market will tell. Until then I'm sticking to the platform that gave me an opportunity that i otherwise would never have gotten anywere else.
I actually quite agree with you that Steemit isn't prepared for a mass influx of users, because it would be a resource terribly wasted with the current retention rate.
SOC (SMTs, Oracles, and Communities) is being designed to fix the issues that drive retention, including stake-weighting, as well as for competition in the space. SMTs enable Steem to be the token monetizing content, ultimately adaptable to every conceivable form of platform.
Regarding HODLing Steem, it is the only token affixed to a social media platform, and has the best use case of any token I am aware of as a result. All other cryptos do not have any such mechanism driving the creation of a market for them, yet they seem to be retained by their HODLers.
I submit that the novel mechanism envisioned to incentivize HODLing Steem has proved both unnecessary, as other tokens are HODLed absent the mechanism, and counterproductive, as it inceitivizes profiteering rather than investment.
Most HODLers of Steem aren't seasoned investors. They haven't invested in, for exaqmple, a small business like a carpet cleaning service, which requires significant continuing input to generate the excellent returns a small business can, nor ordinary investment vehicles like stocks, dividend bearing or otherwise.
While I do not presume to know your personal history of investing, you seem not to be familiar with reasons to invest in a company, and it is a lack of familiarity with investing that leads to the position that being able to extract dividends from the rewards pool is the only reason to HODL Steem.
No other investment in the history of the world has been availed of said rewards, so no other investment has ever required such mechanism. Clearly we see that investment has occurred regardless.
The traditional mechanism that has incentivized investment, including all other cryptos to date, is capital gains. You buy a stock at a given price expecting the price of that stock to rise, producing a gain in capital when you sell the stock.
That is investing, because such HODLers are strongly incentivized to improve the company whose stock they hold, or add value, so that the price will rise.
Extracting rewards from the pool is a counterincentive to do this. It is the basis of profiteering, rather than investing, because profiteers, like vulture capitalists, try to extract maximum ROI as quickly as possible, including by selling the manufacturing tools used by the company they are extracting wealth from (in this case comparable to the author rewards that drive content creation).
Capital gains has proved to be an excellent incentive to drive investment, since before recorded history began. Profiteering has proved to destroy companies so afflicted, as Bain Capital, KKR, and their ilk have proved many times.
I completely disagree that every user would seek to maximize rewards from their clickfarms. Few users do this, here or elsewhere. Those that do aren't mere creators, but profiteers, here, on Insta, and everywhere else they can do so.
That is why clickbait exists, and also why it's reviled. It is the antithesis of good media, and what stake-weighting emphasizes most.
Rewards that aren't stake-weighted do incentivize organic and quality content far better than stake weighted votes, and most people produce content regardless of the rewards on other platforms.
Social media didn't arise because of rewards, but because people like to communicate. Rewarding that based on stake strongly incentivizes clickbaity posts. 1a1v does not.
I know in the crypto-verse every centralized service is the nail to every blockchain solution hammer -- but that isn't the point.
Those services know how to keep people around.
If Steemit can't get their act together, then what is the point?
Bot-topia, with automated crapposts and upvotes?
'bot-topia' love it love it love it.
The stats are not good, but there are many people on the ground trying to improve these numbers. The problem is, steemit inc is only supporting devs with smt possibilities and not people trying to help the folk here on Steemit. By doing this to me they are saying the do not believe in steemit.com. Steemit.com as it is now, if not taken care off will not be the front for the steem blockchain for long, Dlive and other apps will be
I sure hope that Steemit cease becoming the front page of the Steem blockchain too though.
I rather the devs behind Steemit.inc focus on more meaningful things and leave the front end to 3rd party companies. Busy or the dozens other platforms.
IMO the only reason people still use steemit is the 0% beneficiary fee and the habit of using this website. I'm sure that will change soon.
What do you suggest?
What is retention rate of Dlive ? Still a bit early to tell. What is the retention rate of YouTube Adsense creators? I think you have a valid complaint. But then again. How many accounts were scam accounts and what not? How did you get to 13% is what i'm asking? Not saying it's wrong just curious.
@paulag did a analysis - not only of the retention rate, but the theoretical userbase that is actually contributing to Steemit -- and it sure isn't 1 million accounts, more like 45,000 if we're lucky.
Doesn't bode well, is all I'm saying.