You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
RE: Steemit’s New Direction
The team agrees and we are already discussing how we can make contributing code a more satisfactory experience. The challenge is that engineers cannot develop code and review code at the same time, meaning that we are faced with a choice: make the site better, or review code that might make the site better. It's a challenging problem, especially during times when the organization is strapped for resources, but we definitely want to tackle it. Thanks!
This is not exactly true, one hour of reviewing code doesn't equals one hour of producing code in terms of productivity.
Unless the guy who wrote the code did an awful job that makes it super hard to read. You can expect the one hour of reviewing to produce much more than the one hour of coding because he is reviewing like 2-10 hours of code in that one hour.
And it's not even about reviewing code, it's about the community making changes and then having their PR shut down because steemit inc doesn't agree with them. I would have contributed to condenser or steem core myself but I know I'll never do that because there is a moderate to high chance that I'll be wasting my time. And basically all of the devs that I know on steem have the same mindset. We dont want to work on steemit inc owned repositories because history has proven that it's a waste of time and we be better off working on other things.
" make the site better, or review code that might make the site better." => This is the core issue. You guys believe that you can carry all the weight by yourselves and do all the changes because you believe that your time is worth more than everyone elses because you are better than everyone else.
And this breeds this current situation where everyone is just like "well steemit inc will do it"
And this is what happens : Even though you have a lot of knowledge about your own product (obviously) you can't be everywhere at once. A simple example is canonical links. A feature that is vital for a front end (especially steemit.com that's the biggest) to have a healty ecosystem of dapps and yet despite multiple calls to steemit inc to do it we had to wait two years for a community dev to finally do it.
Well said. Upvoting specifically for this bit.
I don't think this is an accurate picture of what we "believe". We believe that we need to do better with respect to helping community members submit code. We understand that it hasn't felt this way in the past. We're doing our best to change that in the midst of very challenging times, we're sorry if you feel our best isn't good enough.
It's not your best and you know it
Hey @andrarchy, remember when you introduced yourself as Steemit's Content Director?
https://steemit.com/steem/@andrarchy/i-m-steemit-s-content-director
You muted me forever for asking questions about content from Steemit and making suggestions to improve content? Oh the IRONY...
I left you this comment in regards to how you treated me.
Let's see if you have any inclination of changing. Oh wait, you can't read this since you've muted me forever. lol
Good one, @socky! 😆
It's definitely moving in the right directly though. I am harsh in regards to the past not the future.
The problems you mention are easily solved with a properly defined contribution process.
Look at StackOverflow, it's the perfect example of a platform that entrusted the community to maintain it and it has worked quite well, which is impressive given the size of StackOverflow and other StackExchange platform sites.
I actually am a core team member of a large open source Javascript framework that is very friendly to open source contributions. We have found that requiring unit tests alone takes a lot of the work out of reviewing, and in most cases changes are simply optimisations or linter warnings.
I haven't examined the Condenser codebase extensively, but from the outset it doesn't look like it has a whole lot of test coverage and I think that should be one of the first places to start. If we can get tests covering most of the current codebase, then we can use those tests to refactor and guide new features, whilst ensuring nothing breaks.
So many talented developers in the community are being wasted, a huge missed opportunity. I don't speak for everyone but as an experienced front-end developer with eleven years experience, I can say if STINC were more receptive to community contributions and trusting, I would gladly help improve not only Steemit but other apps as well.
I think what it comes down to is STINC seems to distrust the very community that keeps this site and blockchain running. Many of us want to see Steem succeed, many of us are working on ways to improve Steem and Steemit itself.
dead on...I can tell you've worked on improving legacy systems doing QA in a large development project or two.
Super excellent advice by a seasoned dev; and in my experience these kinds of views take time to digest in any large O. Source SW group. Egos take time to put aside, critical issues take time to dismiss, and then we have time to start including the community in development.
Seems like great advice! Thanks!
that's where decentralization comes in handy, because there are community members who are also qualified to review code. js. no response necessary.
That's true in general but if the code will run on their servers, they have a responsibility to review it themselves.
one step forward is if SteemIt's CONTRIBUTING.md was a bit more defined like Bitcoin's CONTRIBUTING.md.
Code review is supposed to be the first and easiest step in contributing to an open source project.
The only reason I bother is that when I found Steemit, part of the proposed appeal was decentralization. Every move in that direction will make this project more interesting, if there is really any hope for this instance of the Steem network.
Steemit Inc keeps saying "resources resources" while refusing to loosen their grip and support decentralization. Supporting community contributions, and further decentralization, means less resources required from steemit, and steem begins to look more like an actual blockchain.
I doubt it works that way. They own the dream, they have to shape it and let it reach a stage first before fully opening it up. Plus, they are a company and have responsibilities acknowledge by us, if things go wrong due to contributed code, we will still come out and hold them responsible. While i am not an expert, i understand better now how huge these things are. I went from just posting to steemgigs.org and ulogs.org and even as small scale as it currently is and even though it is open source and receive contributions, in looking for contributors, i still have to look for the exact dev aligned with the vision cos the vision is still building and i want that vision to stay intact, with its framework fully understood before, i leave it all out. cos yes, the vision can so easily change and turn into something else. The current steemgigs.org is the sixth version already. cos i was still learning at the outset, it was mostly seen as a fiverr replacement by contributing developers but in my eyes it was more of a dream-building social interface than a freelancing one with the freelancing just the surface. Also, i wanted to add value to steem in new ways using my interfaces, so contributors didnt understand e.g why i would want whole-post testimonials that are curateable as opposed to just simple reviews etc. so when they build they would go away from my vision and i sometmes at the time, would sway and leave my vision and accept what they offer cos i didnt know about coding at the time and because of wasted time and because i would thinki in my mind it is actually hard for these developers. now i created an entire enterprise called macrohard to solve these things and in the near future i want to create my own progtamming lanugage that people can code in etc. In general, steemit is still fresh and can very much be considered an experiment cos nothing like it ever existed and till date none exists. when i started steem, there was akasha, yours and synereo and some others and i don't see any of those having attain success today and whatever exists out there currently has steemians on it. steem and steemit i am sure has been a learning experience for steemit inc itself and i am very very very sure it is a big deal and would be big deal or even bigger deal, where it is fully open to contribution where the main vision of steemit inc is not set and stable, at least its framework. regardless of what is contributed as well, steemit inc may be held responsible or at least feel responsibile even where the comunity is proven and love steem. I just left this comment here to related my own small experience. overall, entire decentralization doesnt exist and doesn't mean success. even on steemit, it is obvious, someone will still come out and say he has more knowledge and your post has no value. The steem blockchain host humans. where there is ever entire decentralization, that system or tech will be flawed too cos it will still host humans.
I support your comment for sure but perhaps, it isn't so time just yet.
Steemit inc may have been considered slow and all, but i so doubt that no one will not be slow, where steemit and steem is an entirely new tech, never done and without much prior to steem to learn from. those who pop up now and say they are the best and fast in development, is mostly cos they have been on steem and seen steem and build off of that experience.
Its super lame you are justifying and encouraging their centralized position.
we're talking about the community helping with the front-end website.. so many amazingly talented developers in this community that have been cast aside by steemit to make 100 renditions of the steemit website rather than improve this one that hasn't changed in over a year.
FALSE!!!
They have 0 responsibility to users of the platform, and we have 0 power except to vote with our feet, or forking. Unfortunately for most, this system is so complicated by the time anyone learns how fucked it is they are invested too deep to get out.
I'm sorry but there needs to be guidance (which is centralization), there is a difference between, individuals with many different goals and a corporate structure which goal is to figure what is needed for the project and focusing only on the project for the projects sake.
otherwise you have this which I did a year ago...
I'm only angry because I care, and really love the idea of what this platform is supposed to be about
I do love your comments, and I feel your pain. I was working on condenser for a short time, it was so lame, I just gave up before I got started, but I was not encouraged very much, and for that I am still sore...
Reviewing the reviews is generally a lot easier than reviewing the code itself.
Still they could have community members do some of the work like the initial obvious things (coding style/comments/tests/pr is proprely formatted) and not have to spend so much time.
And it's not like there is no incentives for such a system with tools like utopian.io.
You guys seriously don't have a clue. Steemit Inc is an embarrassment and so are most of the top 20 ass kissing witnesses.
Elaborate.
Why, there is nothing in his statement that hasn't been common knowledge for a couple years now.
I just wanna know his thoughs on that statement. What do you think? :D
It's a long story of disappointments, collusion, sneaky behaviors, non-existent management skills, embarrassing and unprofessional behaviors and on and on. You kinda had to be here for a while to see it all, but the gist is, nothing is as advertised, and most of the stuff that happens here is heavily skewed to favor insiders, whether they are known entities or not.
I suppose a proper cynic would point out that all Proof of Stake systems are inherently designed to favor insiders. That's the very definition of the protocol. The more you have, the more power you have, and the more it is in your best interest to protect the circle of who has the resource from anyone outside of the circle as it existed when you joined. Likewise, it's in your best interest to try and force out anyone who was an insider when you managed to join the circle.
As a social dynamic driver, it's fascinating. I'm not sure it's the best design for a commodity.
You know I understand stake Lex, naturally, but you also know what I mean about the arrangements around here that were established before non-insiders, aka outsiders, could even get legitimate stake.
I figured there might be some members of the audience in the cheap seats who weren't up to date on Proof of Stake or who might not have actually thought about what it actually means. There's always a few. You have to play to the audience.
I absolutely understand what you mean about previously extant arrangements. There has been a couple of really good posts about the earliest activity on the blockchain, looking at the posts, looking at the exchanges, and looking at the comments on the code itself, which I have found extremely interesting.
Two rounds of ninja mining, deliberately obscured configuration and design (which still seems to be the order of the day, having looked at some of the stuff that passes for "documentation"), and a standoff organization. That trench was dug around the perimeter from day one.
I do find it mildly ironic that all of those choices are coming back to bite them in the ass because of the difficulty of making the database architecture truly decentralized. If, from the beginning, it was fast and easy to set up full witness nodes – it would have been done already. If, from the beginning, Condenser was well documented and clearly coded, and if they had accepted design ideas from outside – half of the things that have been in the last two roadmaps would've been implemented by now. If they actually wanted to implement a good, customer-servicing social media platform, they've had more than enough opportunity and more than enough feedback to actually start implementing things moving in that direction – but their big innovation is adding advertising to their front insight, nearly half a decade (or a full decade, at this point) from the introduction and widespread adoption of ad blockers.
If one wanted to cynically wonder if they had deliberately hamstrung themselves, there is plenty of material to make that argument.
Thanks. I guess I just want to confirm what i already thought or started to think.
It's almost like you have no idea how open source works Andrarchy. Surely github is just a dump of projects that cannot advance, because engineers can't do two things at once then.
More bullshit. Don't buy it people.
Whats the matter @novacandian, truth hurt? lol the skins around here, so thin because there isn't much substance under some of them.
Eat your own Dogfood Gentleman... You're new replacement Gal cannot even respond to her own comments because she lacks resource credits on this network... YOU of all people should be on this platform EVERY DAMN DAY! Until you and other STINC representatives begin to swim in these waters rather than dipping a toe every now and then; you will continue to look and sound like liars and conmen...
Making changes to code IS important yes, but so is actually BEING HERE rather than Telegram and Twitter... It's provable you guys use the competition and other networks WAYYYY more!
And before you get all indignant with me, just remember you represent a group of people on the network who obnoxiously make a great many of us feel like CHUMPS and SUCKERS. Before you get long winded... be SURE not to whine about trying your best... after this many years and false promises, many of us straight up know you guys are a complete set of CONs.
I'm Frank Bacon and this is MY 5555th post! you have 2110 posts... @ned has half that...
Tell your new Gal to start eating the Dogfood, it's the only way to get through this properly.
'steemit's new direction' is towards the slammer . this platform is so criminal it boggles the mind !