RE: Hardfork 21 is HAPPENING. What will change?
My question is this, though:
Why do bid-bots not just decrease their overhead? Once they have the liquid STEEM they convert it into SP, and the money that other people could have had by curating they receive instead.
This still does nothing to address the concerns with small content creators. How the hell do I get writer friends onto Steem when I know that they're likely to get cents on a dollar compared to what they do elsewhere and the big dogs are going to be the ones getting everything? With a week to get attention to your posts and get them up-voted before they lose value, there's no reason to post evergreen content on Steem when it could fare better elsewhere.
The only reason I'm here is because I wanted to make games and distribute them for free, and Steem seemed like a way to monetize that. Ultimately, I think that's been an absolute failure, in part due to how Steem's been faring on price (I don't believe Steemit has much control over this), but in part because the whole system is weighted toward people who have patrons.
The only reason I'm still around is for the community, but since Steem doesn't really have social features it's limited in that regard because most of the people I'm still sticking around to hang out with I'm interacting with on other platforms.
I think I speak for a lot of us who have left the platform when I say that we're demoralized and we don't have much faith in the system as it stands. To have changes that could seriously hurt people who are trying to claw their way up doesn't make sense. What portion of posts making 20 STEEM right now have done so on their own merits, versus being economically fueled?
The promise of Steem as a platform was that it would be a path to independence, and right now I don't think it's offering that to very many people. There are maybe less than a hundred people who could claim that Steem is anything more than a passion project or pipe dream for them. The nice thing about the linear system is that it's fair. I can see using a curve to weed out dust, especially if it's proven that a lot of very low value posts are bot activity instead of authentic engagement, but I'm not sold on HF 21 doing that.
Where else exactly?
YouTube or personal blogs with ads or writing churn for blogs that pay $10 a piece.
It's not glamorous, and you sacrifice a lot of your independence, but it pays better than Steem does right now and there's more likelihood of exposure outside the network of Steem users.
Now you can't tell me that your "writer" friends make even one cent from writing on YouTube, and personal blogs might net something like 10 bucks every 3 months, if they're good. Which blogs pay 10 bucks a piece for "churn" exactly?
Steem articles have more exposure than just about every blog out there since Steem is not a closed system by any means and everyone can consume the content without any kind of barrier, like paywalls or membership, and to top it all off steem articles dominate search results based on the sheer volume of content and the numerous web sites that link directly to steemit or other frontends.
I don't buy the "you make more on YouTube" or "elsewhere" at all, you know what it seems like: foot in mouth.
Have you ever worked as a writer?
With things like Patreon tied to another content creation service, people make way more than people make on Steem. Ads suck, but between ads and affiliate links you can do okay.
Also, you'd be surprised how many blogs have outsourced writing. Any small news site is going to be paying writers, as are a ton of company and media sites. $10 is the starving college kid pay, too. You can make more if you really get an audience.
Also, you can't eat off of exposure. I don't even know that you're correct about how well Steem draws traffic, because it's impossible to tell the reader/upvote ratio, but I actually suspect that I generally have a smaller readership than upvotes due to bots that are trying to snipe curation rewards and curation trails. Steem links may get some search results. Even then, after seven days your benefit for any content you've posted is gone (and I know there are ways to work around this, but they're not super user-friendly).
Steem's promise was as a way to achieve independence.
I've earned more in five hours of freelance writing than I've earned for several hundred posts on Steem (I've invested money in Steem too, though I always bought super low so I'm not in pain due to the low value).
Now, that's exceptional because it was a twenty-cents-a-word situation, which is basically the skies opening up and raining money, but I could be pulling down a lot more money off Steem than on. The only reason I'm here is for the freedom, and I'm not even sure that's worth it.
Which people and how many out of every potential thousand do that? You're saying that people make more "writing" for YouTube through their Pateron link than people make on steem but avoiding the facts: how many people do that, how competitive is it. All these blogs and content media web sites that pay their writers but which combined haven't a chance to compete with the ammount of money steem has paid content creators or the number of content creators that got paid and keep getting paid.
I seen so many things people claimed that "steem" promised them that the accompanied eye rolls are instinctual by now whenever I read such things.
BAT Tipping Jars are going to replace services like Patreon due to greatly decreased fees and ability to tip lower amounts. A 1 BAT tip results in a 0.95 BAT deposit into a Brave Creator Wallet.... Currently 1 BAT is about $0.20
Right now, BAT tipping is active on Twitter, Reddit, Youtube, and a growing number of social media platforms. It's not too inconceivable that in the very near future, a content creator will be able to post on Platform Whatever and receive rewards into a single location... a BAT Wallet (currently on Uphold)...
Some BAT nice graphics
https://zapread.com
https://publish0x.com
Probably medium.com
Some alternatives for Steem
https://www.zapread.com/Home/About
Total Satoshi spent, try not to laugh at what a failure the donate model is, and calling it donate model is a stretch since a large portion doesn't even go to the author.
Same model as Steem, only hidden.
// You get 1 Steem
// But wait, Steem doesn't pay in dollars / BTC, Steem pays in tokens. Who pays in dollars / BTC? Investors ...
Steem is a network worse than ZapRead, Publish0x, but without a system based on game theory. The fact that you can't see it means that the system is hiding it perfectly.
It's not the same model by any means, but nice try at asserting that a donation based system is the same as a stake based system.
It does not matter what it's paid in, it's irrelevant squared, what matters is how it has value and why it maintains it. In a donation system the entire value rests on people spending money/giving money, on a stake based system the entire value rests on people staking more than extracting. If they staked dollars it would be no different, same for bitcoin or any other token/store of value.
The system isn't based on game theory, at best it utilizes incentive structures based on game theory, it's based on cryptocurrency communities and social media. The "fact" that you think donating money is no different from staking money means you haven't a clue as to distinguish between a zero sum game and a cooperative, everyone-wins game.
The subsidy system as in ZapRead is even better in many ways. This is due to the fact that by voting for the content you vote only for the best (in your opinion).
The Steem system is the worst in economic terms because you give money that is not yours to another person you probably don't know. (As in socialism).
For example, I like BernieSanders, but I wouldn't give him a grant probably. But I don't pay anything for Steem, so I could give it to him for nothing.
As for Stake. In general, you freeze the funds in your account, but these funds were created from the air. In most cases you didn't pay for the tokens (but I can be wrong), like most of us. Stake is supposed to stop Steem from falling, but if the situation gets worse, people will evacuate and withdraw money from Stake, what's going on.
Hard Fork 21 is supposed to try to prevent it. There will be less liquid, more frozen.
I guess there's always some kind of loss in the system. Someone has to pay for the fact that you get tokens, sometimes for nothing.
Exactly how voting works anywhere: you vote for what you think is the best, in your opinion. So what's the difference lol..
The money is yours. You have a stake in the system that gives you the right to distribute according to your stake. Who's money is it if it's not yours. And what the heck are you talking about knowing or not the other person, you think that is relevant at all, wtf.
For nothing? Yes because your steem did not cost anything correctly, it was given freely to you, without ANY effort on your part. Damn you're pulling at futile strings, first you tried to claim that transferring wealth, exactly how donation model works, is no different from staking wealth and distributing an inflatory pool of resources. You tried to argue that it's no different because you have to sell your steem for dollars, because that makes sense at all that it's the same as donating, now here you are trying to claim that the stakeholders don't have any right to distribute the wealth, because it's not theirs. Shit, you seemingly think that everyone is as retarded as you to try and assert some utter nonsense like that, after your previous idiotic remarks seeking to defend some oddity that has absolutely no chance in hell of surpassing steem, as is obviously evident by any cursory comparison of the userbase and subsequent success at their "endeavor" (more like a "pay us 10%, always, because).
Yeah, your stake was handed out, like everyone else, without any effort on their part. What you are trying to say besides that idiocy of "funds were created from thin air" is that staking is not holding value, and thus is a poor mechanism to secure value, which is why donations/tips are so much better, or something, because I'm sure you had some point that tied back into the idiocy that transfer of wealth is no different than wealth rewarded by wealth staked directly to hold power over distribution of wealth to be rewarded.
Let me help you out:
When the mashed potatoes are passed around the table, they are distributed. When you take your mashed potatoes and give them to someone else you transfered your mashed potatoes.
I can only laugh at the thought that you might consider what you said as half intelligent / thoughtful but seriously, invest some time in improving your reasoning and critical thinking skill, it's deplorable.
Not really. For example Bidbots upvote the entries of the people who paid for it. So not the best.
Bidbots are only one piece of the puzzle
The money you give (for example) me isn't yours. You don't lost anything. Milton Friedman create a good chart about it
So in ZapRead (donate) version you are in point 2. You spending your money for someone else
In Steem - 4. You give money to someone (according to your own Stake) that doesn't exist.
The rest of the fast I assume it's gibberish, so I'm not gibberish, so I'm not gonna write back.
Worse than those oddities that have nothing to do with steem what so ever? Sure.
The other one is even more hilarious :
The distribution wallet which includes all their "sponsored" authors cash outs:
https://etherscan.io/address/0xF9879bB3230f86fFCebcA652C5FB6Ec4504309be#analytics