Third Livestream Test Tomorrow
Tune in to our third livestream test happening tomorrow, Thursday, November 29th at 11am CST. Post your questions for Ned and special guest, @andrarchy, here and they will cover as much as they can live. See you soon.
Be sure to subscribe and set your alerts to be notified when we're live!
Hi @ned. Looking forward to the livestream tomorrow.
My comment is going to be a combination of questions and feedback. Hopefully it won't get too long :)
While I am sure this is an unbelievably challenging time for many involved (especially those in the 70%), I am hopeful that this event can become a turning point where we all come together and align our priorities, and set ourselves on whatever track is going to give Steem the best chance for success going forward.
One of the biggest questions that I think everybody is wondering is: what are Steemit, Inc's priorities going to be in the next three months?
Before answering though, I will mention that it might be OK to say "we don't know yet". Figuring out the answer to that question is probably going to be one of the most important things that Steemit does as a result of what happened.
To offer some of my own suggestions, I will add the following:
Anyway, I've gone on long enough.. I will try to wrap it up.
My only other "question" is: Would Steemit, Inc. be willing to present the community with an overview of where the money over the past two years has gone? This would be really enlightening, and also go a long ways towards rebuilding trust with the community.
My last piece of advise is don't be afraid to reach out to the community and ask for help if/when you need it. We are all on the same team, and we all want the same thing (success of Steem).
Best of luck as you navigate through the tough waters ahead.
Quick wins FTW
Would Steemit, Inc. be willing to present the community with an overview of where the money over the past two years has gone?
An answer to this question would be highly appreciated.
100000000 percent this. You had to cut 70 percent of staff? No problem. There are TONS of talented people here in this community. If we leverage each other’s talents Steem can really take off again
true
Totally Agreed.
@ned
In my observation ( 1-10 scale) , we are almost at zero and there is a lot to show to the outside world ( Dtube/Musing/Actifit/Partiko/Sharetosteem/Steem community/so on..).
It wouldn't even take a whole lot of dev resources , so , can we atleast turn marketing up to 3 ?
+1 for prioritizing bringing in more investors. Without it the price declines making the whole platform potentially unstable due to layoffs etc.
My suggestion was to remove SBD which doesn't hold a peg anyway and complicates the experience and prioritize getting on more exchanges.
Perhaps they should go all in on marketing the blockchain and the benefits of the blockchain and the potential of the blockchain and the SMT idea.
They tried marketing a dApp with steemit.com you want them to try that again?
Maybe focus on the successful dApps to help market the blockchain.
Quick wins are short term thinking. It would excite investors for a while, but when it doesn't last Steem would risk being dismissed as another crypto scam. Ned is wise to go forward with a view toward the long term.
However, I would also like to know what Steemit Inc's priorities are going forward.
Focusing on quick wins does not mean that we just completely abandon long term vision.
When we focus too much on long term things though and never make any visible progress on improving the platform in ways that investors care about, then we continue to slide down in price.
I view quick wins as just smaller steps toward the same longer term vision.
I have a few suggestions/comment/questions. For those phrased in the form of comments or suggestions, you can also take them as questions in the sense that I would love to hear your views on them.
I agree with just about all of this. Getting SMTs out with at least minimal functionality is all many of these projects need. Lets get them something.
I think the sun set plan for steemit.com is a great idea or to just turn it into a wallet only. Steemit needs to focus on blockchain development.
See @noisy's comment as well. I love the idea of having "Steemit.com-off weeks" both on their own and as part of a sunset plan.
I disagree I think sunsetting it completely is a better idea. People look at steemit and see how shitty the design is and then associate the cryptocurrency with steemit. The cryptocurrency is the one of best, but the interface on steemit.com is one of the worst. Why couple the two?
We will never be able to decouple steemit.com with steem cryptocurrency without sunsetting steemit.com or rebranding the cryptocurrency or changing the domain of steemit.com
I have some techy friends that don't even understand the difference, let alone the masses. Even coinbase description of steem has it wrong.
Disagree with what? I'm in favor of sunsetting (I should be since I was literally the one who proposed it). I just think that @noisy's idea of some temporary scheduled blackouts can be a useful part of that process.
BTW, it was always a possibility that the steemit site and nodes could just disappear. As in more suddenly and disruptively than this (company goes out of business, encounters more severe financial issues and needs to shut down the site RIGHT NOW, etc.). We were never prepared for that and at least with @noisy's temporary downtime we'd have a better idea of ecosystem vulnerabilities. Like a fire drill.
I've also suggested the renames. Multiple times.
At least now we have their attention somewhat.
Disagree that we should only do temporary blackouts, it's either all or nothing.
"At least now we have their attention"
Yeah...The issue is the ideas you brought up are very good, but it's another thing if they actually do them. That's huge concern of mine. Are they going to announce any decisions or just say "it's on the table" for all the suggestions.
Track record says....
There is always hope for a change. Until there isn't.
Lmao yeah...
Very good points. We need SMTs and we need them fast. Many communities and projects on Steem are issuing tokens on other Blockchains already that will later be swapped for SMTs - if SMTs would be delayed beyond Q1 19 they should instead be lauded with a basic functionality asap, even without ICO functionalities.
Discontinuing free api nodes would significantly slow the growth and use of Steem. We wouldn't need Steemit Inc to run public api nodes if there were enough witnesses running them - so why not have all top 20 witnesses run api nodes? Sports leagues have requirements such as stadium size to get into the first league, why not make running an api node a requirement for a witness to get into the top 20?
With a declining STEEM price as well as the refocus of witness role on block signing and governance rather than a general funding source that took place in HF16 (was an 80% cut), there isn't really enough money in witness rewards and especially not if the STEEM price were to decline to say its previous lows of 0.05 to 0.10.
Currently all witness rewards are approximately $800K per year (total, not each) which doesn't even cover but a fraction of the $2 million/year Steemit is paying in direct costs to operate nodes. That's assuming that all witness rewards went to this purpose which is obviously absurd. It further ignores the significant admin cost for these nodes which buildteam (which operates its own nodes for its business) has estimated at similar or more than the hardware costs.
If the STEEM price were to decline to historic lows then total witness revenue would drop to about 1/3 to 1/8 of that, or perhaps as little as $100K/year ($5K/year each!), which again is nowhere near enough for free high volume nodes open to everyone in the world.
This isn't a sustainable solution either. What is needed is not a way to shift around who runs the free nodes but a model where those operating businesses on Steem run their own nodes (ideal) or pay for a third party to run them (not ideal in terms of centralization but at least economically sustainable).
Some low volume free nodes may make sense as a community initiative where people volunteer to run nodes so people can at least run a simple wallet and access their coins, but for high usage as needed by major web sites or businesses, that needs to have some sort of sustainable funding attached to it.
It is not typical for decentralized cryptocurrencies to be run on the basis of free (and highly centralized) high volume open public nodes. Sometimes free low-volume community-run nodes as I mentioned but other than that businesses either run their own nodes or pay for a service. Steem can do what everyone else does here.
Steem already attracts less developers than other Blockchain (EOS, Ethereum) despite having very low fees to run a service since access to (slow) public api nodes is free and so are transactions (if the account has enough RC). The ability to launch a dApp on a shoestring budget is a huge plus of Steem at the moment. Shutting down access to free nodes would shrink the amount of developers interested in building on Steem and therefore the value of Steem as a Blockchain. I agree with you that dApps that have grown successfully and then need more reliable and faster nodes can start their own as it is already happening, but even right now the public nodes available are barely enough to keep up with the demand, so I don't believe that shutting down Steemit Inc.'s public nodes without a free replacement would be a good solution.
I believe that we need public nodes, but a decentralised Blockchain should not be controlled by one entity such as Steemit Inc. so I believe that having public api nodes run by witnesses - some of who would outsource them to a company such as Privex - would be a good solution. Maybe we should think of a witness pay composed of a fixed value in Steem as well as a second dynamic part oriented on USD values which guarantees that the minimum costs of running a top 20 witness plus an api node are always covered - this would come out of the rewards pool, but if Steemit Inc. would consequently either develop features that increase the value of Steem or sell less of their stake what pushes down the price, the price of Steem and the reward pool would increase. Also, this could mean decreasing the amount witnesses get from the rewards pool when prices are high - I remember in January many were complaining about witnesses getting overpaid, now it's the other way around, so obviously witnesses receiving a fixed percentage of the rewards pool is not a good solution since they have costs in fiat to cover.
Then I suggest you volunteer to pay the $2 million/year. Perhaps that cost can be reduced, in fact I'm sure it can. But it could also increase if demand grows. Personally I'd much rather have Steemit spend that money on blockchain development (not to mention staying in business/survival), which they are at this point uniquely qualified to do. With sufficient funding (not a Steemit Inc strong suit at the moment), anyone (or at least many people with the right experience) can run nodes.
BTW, witness rewards are a tiny fraction of the rewards paid out by Steem (10% of total inflation vs. 75% for post rewards). If you think free nodes are a good use of reward funds, then I suggest making one or more daily/weekly/whatever posts requesting support for free public node service and if people agree with your philosophy they can vote for it. I don't rule out that this could be a good idea. But for something to replace Steemit nodes will still be very expensive (consume a significant portion of the reward pool), and the cost can easily grow with increased usage.
Again, I don't know what EOS does (simply not familiar with it) but neither Ethereum miners nor the Ethereum Foundation provide free nodes. People who need nodes run their own or pay for a service.
Exactly (so whatever plans you have along the lines discussed above, you better plan to not only replace the Steemit nodes but actually scale UP). That's because this model is unsustainable. Nobody even knows what those public nodes are being used for. It could be hugely wasteful/inefficient usage or they could even be deliberately overworked by competitors. The model is not viable.
A decentralized blockchain is strengthened by people running their own nodes. There will inevitably be nodes as a service, which hurts decentralization, but trying to fund and operate a free service that encourages (nearly) everyone to use them is actually sabotaging (by centralizing) the network. It is quite terrible that when Steemit's nodes go down, as they have on occasion, nearly the entire ecosystem crashes. This undermines not only the operation of the network at that time, but its ongoing reputation because it is clear that everything is centralized and its "'decentralized' apps" are a sham. Even before financial problems forced the question, I was against Steemit's free node service. People should run their own, and in practice, most won't if there is a free option.
For very low usage (people just wanting to use a wallet to access their funds, experiments by devs working on a new project, etc.) there can be low-capacity free nodes offered by the volunteers in the community. But there is simply no reason for a deployed and scaled-up application to expect to rely on a free service. Life would be wonderful if all sorts of nice things were free, but they mostly are not.
I don't want Steemit Inc to spend money on running public nodes either - but we still need them.
These $2 Million currently come from Steemit Inc.'s Steem stake being sold and as a result pushing down the price of Steem decreasing the rewards pool for everyone. What if we raised the witness rewards dynamically to over 10% while the price is low and decrease them when the price is high as suggested in my previous comment?
And still they have much more more developers creating exciting dApps than Steem does - that's why their market cap is much higher. Take the free nodes away from Steem and people like me (developer on a student budget) will start looking into alternatives.
What if we introduced a new model: Nodes are freemium and accessed with API keys. Each developer who wants to access the public nodes can apply for an api key (or something similar tied to account keys), usage is tracked and if it exceeds certain limits the developer can choose to pay for higher limits or run their own private node?
Then witnesses will be selling stake instead, pushing the price down.
Now you are talking. I suggested elsewhere the possibility of a free tier with low limits (like AWS has) and the owner of buildteam, which is one of the companies potentially interested in providing node service as a business (if Steemit stops undercutting them with unlimited service at the unsustainable price of zero), responded favorably. I'm pretty sure that we can come up with a solution (maybe 'free tier' maybe something else) for students and independent devs who want to experiment without needing to pay a lot for 'commercial grade' service. Nobody is against that.
Thanks for engaging with the community.
Businesses need simple tokens. Communities need full SMTs.
One major idea is that businesses on the block will promote the block by way of marketing their business. In order to make that happen we need a way to create simple tokens.
With the delay of full SMTs can Steemit work on making an easy way that everyone can issue simple tokens? This should be a far simpler activity that gets us 90% of the way there to accumulating money through tokens on Steem.
I'll agree with this. It would be nice to see something delievered and having simple tokens would help build some communities with additional users, providing additional motivation. Otherwise, I fear we'll just muddle through the next few months with little or nothing to show for it and perhaps not much of a community left. The potential here remains huge and I'm still 'all in'. We can accomplish a lot with just a few more tools.
I remember that I proposed something like this a couple of months ago, but by that time, nobody anticipated that the price of Steem would go so low back then. The bad part is that building this would require a lot of time and who knows how the market will look like by then...
A Little Context
It's just a fact of software design that the first version runs too slow, lacks required features, and/or costs too much to operate. One solution is to throw it away.
With that in mind, there are varying levels of how much of the platform (if any) should be migrated to a completely fresh new design approach. For example, the current API design could be thrown away, but that would impact the entire ecosystem. On the other hand, just Hivemind could be thrown away, and barely any of the rest of the ecosystem would be impacted (though I would be sad).
As the most extreme variation, you mentioned a pitchfork before. Just for a little more context:
A pitchfork is when you restart the blockchain from block #1, then import things like public keys and set the balances, and abandon the old chain.
Actual Question
My question is, do you see a pitchfork as a last resort? Or is it just a tool to pick up if the time arrives? What circumstances would make pitchforking a certainty?
Edit: I want to also include what @timcliff said, that it might be OK to say "we don't know yet".
Update After Livestream: I believe my question was answered. In a nutshell, it sounds like a pitchfork is off the table in favor of expanding RocksDB. This is great news. And it makes a lot of sense from a scalability perspective.
So will we lose all our posts and other things in the event of this happening? Steemmonsters has relied on coustom jsons and will those be lost too?
No. The state of the chain will be the same, just the blockchain will restart at block #1, with a huge genesis block. (Or a huge block right after genesis)
Isn't the goal of restarting to reduce the size back down to zero(at least thats what I got from reading @ned's last post. But wouldn't that just cause all the data to go right back in there and cause the chain size to go right back up?
Your balance is below $0.3. Your account is running low and should be replenished. You have roughly 10 more @dustsweeper votes. Check out the Dustsweeper FAQ here: https://steemit.com/dustsweeper/@dustsweeper/dustsweeper-faq
That would depend on how it's implemented. If the goal of the pitchfork is to drop a single field, or change the characteristics of a field you'd have to use a pitchfork, but then everything else comes over.
On the other hand, maybe you wanted to remove all of the posts from the blockchain and use some other storage strategy.
It depends entirely on the problem you're trying to solve.
In the case of an app like Steem Monsters, it would be pretty "easy" (though non-trivial) for them to just transition to the pitchforked chain by deriving the data from original chain, and not rely on the custom_json migration to make the transition for them.
Dropping content by certain types of accounts could be a smart move to reduce the overall size of the chain. 40k account farms do add up.
If something like this were to happen, I hope we'd get a few weeks ahead of hearing about this decision. I'd like to save my posts done in here, if this isn't the valid place to store them anymore. :S
the posts are not going anywhere. They are stored on the blockchain. There a decentralized copies of that. You also could download markdown versions of every of your posts with this https://steemit.com/steemdev/@holger80/store-all-posts-from-an-author-in-markdown-files script
would like to know what skill sets have been lost with the staff layoffs ?
and which ones we still have on-board , since we don't know who all is on the team from the begining.
I am very interested in this also.
Excellent question, Paula!
And in addition to that: Are you considering to call on community input in order to cover the now missing resources? There are projects like @utopian-io and @oracle-d who're already bundling top-notch skill sets across uncountable fields of knowledge. Involve them / us now!
Questions:
Do you plan to market/promote steem in a major way at some point in the future?
Will you continue to fund development by selling steem?
Did you lose any developers as part of the lay-offs?
Do you plan on using/creating a model that will generate revenue for steemit.inc that doesn't involve selling steem?
Thanks!
Is Steemit going to take steps to devolve ownership of the blockchain codebase?
Lot's of good questions in here already.
Here's mine:
Steem Monsters can utilise all their Steempower to reward their community for adding value to Steem Monsters.(because they have a second revenue stream).
Would Steem inc consider doing similar with their stake to add value to Steem inc? It's currently not being used.
Further explanation:
There is plenty of talent on here that will happily do work for you guys for an upvote or maybe some delegation (think normal amounts, 5k-20k).
You guys want to build tools to create great communities but at times forgetting to use the one you have build already.
Don't underestimate the willingness of this community to do what it takes and to help out.
What we need to know is what you guys need and then we can think about how to bring these two together.
It could suppress costs (using your stake is free) and help you guys out wherever you need it and it will also let talented people earn some extra Steem.
More info with comments from the community here in the post on my blog.
Great point, I don't know why something this obvious has never been utilized!
About a year ago I took a day to try and find any possible way to get in contact with "steemit.com management" to pitch an idea I had for a full steemit promotional photo and video package. It took me hours just to find someone I could actually potentially contact. I gave them the pitch, told them I would be willing to do the entire project paid in Steem. Obviously, of course, never heard a word back from anyone. Doing the research and trying to find any steem promotional material outside of Steemit, and the no response from the "promotional manager" or whatever, showed me exactly how much Steemit inc was interested in actually doing some marketing, even if it were to be paid with steem. I like your idea, but I don't have high hopes.
I've had the same question for a while. Maybe there's an amount of 'fear' of using this stake because everyone will have an opinion on the ways and amounts it will be distributed, and it's possible Steemit Inc wants to be as impartial as possible. But it's a damn shame to not use it. I'm curious to hear some input on this from Ned as well, and let us figure out of there's a way we can use the stake by for example delegating it to a Utopian/Utopian-alternative that will be serving as a 'third (impartial) party' and reward contributions done by talented Steemians.
Hey @andrarchy and @ned, @o07 and I have been chatting. If you guys decide to sunset steemit.com and put more into marketing, here are some thoughts:
Pull top spokespersons from designated communities on the blockchain to create an impression of the company and what it's capable of being on this blockchain:
All these guys are whales, orcas, dolphins, and influencers who have worked their way up. They've stuck around for a long time. For a reason. They are loyal, heavily invested, highly integrated with the community, and they want to see this blockchain succeed. When we're in a dip, they don't bat an eyelash. They keep this place going. These represent segments of our steem society that make this place unique and possible for so many. They are all authentic, dedicated bloggers on this blockchain. Show them off. They are your BIGGEST asset. They're from different countries, different backgrounds, and they each have different talents to offer and rally around.
The other thing is, none of these people will likely charge you to use them for marketing. They're all just good people who want this place to succeed. I bet they'd just be glad for the opportunity. They are just here to preach the good word of steem.
#toughcompetitioniscoming #weneedourallstarsready
Is the green one @coruscate???
They are the competition, this is would be her!
Hahahah Phew. I thought I was going to have to double down on eating more tacos to fill out the green suit at first. 😂
LMAO.
Ha ha ha! Yep.