I just scrolled through his posts and found what I believe was my first encounter to his thoughts on this, to which I find myself in agreement (and have since my first exposure to crypto).
https://blurt.blog/blurt/@rycharde/dependencies-are-more-important-than-decentralisation
I sometimes forget just how brilliant he is. In looking at many of his posts as I scrolled through just now to find this one, it serves a a reminder to me that sometimes there are many posts in an authors blog worth revisiting despite the passage of time.
I'll be curious what your thoughts on the post are. If you comment to him on that post, could you tag me so I can give it a read? I'd greatly appreciate it.
It's always depending on what we mean by decentralization. Even those witnesses can do everything to not lose that power and always stay in charge. Or to not care about that and keep building it for people. But letting only stake to decide what's trending, who should be in charge, is not right to do. We should also consider other concepts. And the more of them will be considered the healthier the space will be. @ultravioletmag said it right, that we have to have the balance between proof of stake and proof of brain. Going fully proof of stake and making mostly corrupted upvotes in trending, for me is not right to do. If those upvotes can be corrupt, so other types of votes could be corrupt as well. Maybe that's the biggest reason why I hated them in steem first, and now in blurt. Imagine most whales turning to upvote bots when such service will be created like the one in steem.
My main concern is with property rights and free speech being protected. If this changes, as I mentioned to her just moments ago, from what there was when I joined I'll probably be leaving as I did with Hive. I powered down quietly there many months before I found out about Blurt and began researching. I had thought I was done with all of this until I understood what was being offered here in freedom of speech and property rights being honored.
I think our brains are also property, and we have to protect them.
In what way(s) are you seeing this not be respected now?
When the proof of stake is leading. By brains, I mean proof of brain. So, if the proof of brain is not that supported, or less supported, it could hurt some brains.
In a true freedom landscape, if proof of brain is what folks want wouldn't that be the draw for support? I ask this in all seriousness as one who largely supports proof of brain, or perhaps one could call it proof of energy. I find so many posts filled with energy and brain that I find it difficult to vote for it all as it is.
Me too, that is why it's taken me so long to review all these comments. I unleashed a can of something....my goodness.
Yes you did, although as I said I've spent so much time on this subject over the last year or so I've grown tired of repeating the same stances, lol.
Yeah, that's true, it's so hard to vote for them all. But at least we should value them, just like we value money. Maybe it's hard to do for some people, but we should do that. We all want good for blurt after all. We just don't want to see investors coming and seeing those empty pages trending. They don't even have comments on them. I don't think that investors will be interested in that. We are just different. If you think that upvote bot will attract investors, you have the right to think so. I'll never agree with that. Anyway, we will live and see if that's correct to support or not. The price after a year will show us.
It was conceded back when the original push to ban upvu was made and the foundation made a compromise that they would only at that time block new delegations. That if the ban would include returning the current delegations to their owners would result in a sell off which would tank the price. Upvu coming here did play a role in the upward movement in value as investors came solely to use their service.
At that same time, the coal list was reactivated as one of the main focuses of complaint was they were supporting stolen work.
Once they became coal compliant the next wave of attack against them began.
But from their harshest critics (c-time and double-u) it was acknowledged in that post by double-u in their agreement not to tank the price that these investors had indeed played a role in the higher valuation.
I don't have time to look it up, and honestly I grow weary of defending personal property rights. I think after today I'm just going to step back and if the chain decides to no longer respect the rights then I'll know how to proceed from there. I've been involved for it seems a year discussing this, my points all being the same the entire time.
It seems so easy to understand that there is room here for both investors and investor/bloggers. Both hats bringing value to the chain.
As an example of this, I spend easily 20+ hours a week since coming here. I fully understand why many investors don't even have a fraction of this kind of time to devote to this. Hell, today alone I've spent like 3+ hours on here already.
I don't wish the time sink to be an impediment for those who would add value by investment if it didn't demand a time sink.
So in response to we will see, we already have, some time back.