You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
RE: My Announcement March 15 2017
In the long run, I would see the license change, but not now.
That's the best thing I've heard all day.
But again, we have to trust you, @ned. In a world of trustless cryptographically secure systems and provably secure smart contracts, asking for trust is a lot to ask.
Completely feel you on this and perhaps something can be done to assuage the concern. from my pov I am relying on DPoS, and not on Steemit or me. Witnesses can be anonymous and the system runs whether Steemit tries to be part of it or not... I'm glad we are though.
Thanks Ned. I appreciate your community involvement today, especially when it's been such a stressful one. That speaks volumes about your character and your commitment to the future.
Not like the PoW projects, actually DPOS is based on trust. We have been trusting from the beginning.
That's a valid point, but PoW has other problems, which I'm sure you're aware. With Bitcoin, as an example, we now have to trust the large mining firms/guilds not to collude together for their own benefit. We have to trust changes will be implemented that benefit everyone instead of being stalled by the powerful. I remember a point in time where a large mining guild decided to split up (against their own short term interests) because the community was too concerned with the percentage of hashing power they controlled. I was glad they did it, but it reminded me how much trust is still involved in PoW as well, even if it's trust that those involved will remain rational actors for their own long-term self interest. At least with DPOS there's a mechanism for making that trust transparent with a voting process everyone can participate in.
FYI - https://steemit.com/license/@timcliff/update-license-md-to-reflect-views-of-steemit-inc-expressed-by-sneak-lawyer-help-requested
Yep, reading it now. :)