A review of blurts blockchain report By user accounts @symbionts of the coming code changes to take place soon. Your opinion matters
Laying things as they are.
Based only on my own observations and experience on the three blockchains (steemit, hive and blurt), I share with you all some links and simple explanations, to the best of my ability, to further explain what the techy language is saying. Laying out clear definitions.
If I left anything out, please make a post about it better than mine and share it here.
Many of the topics mentioned in the "Pip" have some technical terms that some know nothing of so, I will link the answers with video or articles previously well written with any questions as such:
HF and SF(Soft Forks) must happen from time to patch security holes, for example, or to change the sub structure of the chain such as "the reward curve" as mentioned in symbiants report, to a more "linear one."
What that means for the chain will be discussed further below in light, but let us dive a little into what these terms mean. What is this curve?
In my own simple words, "The reward curve" is just this, a boundary of rules to keep reward distribution in check in according to consensus protocols, ie, witnesses agreeing to the rule changes.
In the old steemit days, reward curve was a major issue due to whale vote abuse and bidbot abuse.
"Here's how people bled steem dry of value while giving nothing back: People used a system called vote stacking. They make multiple bids to 5-10 bidbots and because of the way the reward curve works, as their post went up $50 - $80 - $120 etc, they compounded the gains they make from the bidbot votes. So what a lot of dodgy people were doing was using this method to garuntee $10/$20+ on posts that were utter garbage! Some were doing this multiple times a day. This is why imo(in my opinion) the best thing for steem is simply to push bidbots out of the system."
-raj808
Source
And push them out they did, on blurt we have bidbots, something I myself am also not to keen on, but since blurt token has no real intrinsic value of its own other than a method to pass wealth from one to another, with a double printing of blurt resources from thin air, I personally don't see it mattering that much at all.
But they patched up this issue nonetheless. A good call in my book. So if your buying votes, don't expect much from my end.
NEXT:
What is the reward pool?
Every day, a fixed amount ofSTEEMBLURT tokens are allocated to the network reward fund, commonly called the "reward pool." These get distributed to authors and curators for posting and voting on content.
Source: What is the rewards pool?
Well that covers the basics on a surface view.
Let's look into the changes in the coming few forks.
Each fork has these "bips" or points or issues that need to be addressed.
In the first upcoming HF which will be the 9th one otherwise known as
HF09
BIP 0001
Changing the reward curve to follow a linear curve. Which means that the field will be levelled between bots and people who engage in manual curation, considering that front running will no longer be as lucrative as before. People will not see a huge difference in the rewards that they are getting, but everyone will have a say directly proportional to their stake.
Again we have steemit to have taken the front of the dpos experiment to know what happens after a linear curve is implemented.
steemits forgotten history tells: "convergent linear curve" what is it? And how is the change going to effect rewards?
The question I have no answer to, how similar of a result are we going to have?
A quote from the link above:
It was the year 2016 when we witnessed the first-ever decentralized social platform Steemit on the top of Steem Blockchain, at that time the reward curve on Steem Blockchain was quadratic/superlinear, with its function f(x)= x2. It really encouraged people to invest more in STEEM and then power it up as Steem Power(SP), as more SP you have, the more reward you can generate. But later it was found that it discouraged the common middle class and the Newcomers. Also, it led to-- "The rich get richer".
In the year 2017(June' 2017), the reward curve(quadratic equation) was replaced by a linear equation, f(x)=x. This really looked fair for all, in line with the spirit of decentralization & equal opportunities for all. But even if it looked fair to all, it led to a number of parallel posts, with no social intersection, people started self upvoting, so it was found that the social behavior tends to be selfish with a linear equation. Further, it also led to sheer abuse of reward pool by using bot upvote for poor content and pushing it to the top, which led to poor content discovery.
Is this what we are to face now in blurt? Encouraging more self votes and poor content discovery?
"It's not about quality"
It's about rewards. Less for you and more for them.
I think, a linear curve would be a shot in the foot.
We have self voters, circle jerks, bidbots and now "the linear curve" to encourage it more.
What did steemit coders do to fix this? A convergent linear curve was implemented. Causing self voting discouragement.
User sapwood adds:
The beauty of convergent linear reward is that every time a new user visits and curates the post, the STEEM reward per rShares increases. So more the people approve content, the more is the reward it generates and becomes a trending post, visible to all.
And with no Downvotes, and a convergent linear curve, IMO, would mean that posts would not be manipulated soley by highstake users but more by organic votes to push posts to trending.
But, we have bidbots.
Fuck.
And they can be "fixed" to push selective posts, based on how much you pay. Basically, if you got deep pockets, your posts can be on trending indefinitely, even if it is a shitty post.
@lucylin makes that quite clear here Its about data collection, "any data" and I want to add, about more rewards, for the upper gods above all of blurt. Lol.
It is a crab bucket and it is going to get crabbier, or the water is going reside as the bucket has holes in it and simply pretending it doesn't exist, while pretending it's a business, pursuading the crabs to drink less and add more water fast enough (extreme powerups) so that the rich at the top get the fresher water and crab food, above the rest, as the rest that are below, to keep this sinking boat afloat.
Fuck the middle and lower class right?
Feel free to correct these assumptions and points if I am off, but that is what I see coming here in BIP0001
Also, who is front running here? Where did that come from? Are there any examples to show this? Feel free to comment that out.
BIP0002
Removing the five-minute curation window, which will complement the new curation curve. People will no longer be penalized if they vote before five-minute or did not vote early.
5 minutes after a post is made is the time one should vote. Having this, can encourage people to read what they vote rather than voting on it and not reading it. A chance to incentivize content appreciation.
I would like this to stay as is for the issue of sniper curation. Removing this will, IMO, give the green light for curation bots to stay ahead of the curve above the organic voter.
Another shot in the foot, IMO. Your welcome to opine differently.
BIP 0003
Removing the last twelve hours curation penalty because it is a system inherited from the chain we forked from that no longer plays any role on Blurt considering that there is no rewards regulation on Blurt.
No reward regulations on blurt? Whats with the BP whitelist then? The change in reward curve about? Lol 😆
Steemit may not play a role directly, but it's experiences and its history can sure help us see what is to come on many fronts also with hive.
I sense self voting at the last minute coming. Do you? Since fewer eyes see this and with little to no data reports unlike what hive has established...
Yea, selfish self voters, you got it made, a window has been opened to you. But then again, why does it matter anyways when the value of blurt token is shite to none. Keep powering up smaller joes, blurt is printing double out of thin air anyways.
Let me remind you with a quick simple explenation video on why printing out of thin air is a joke, by learning how the monetary system works.
BIP 0004
Fixing the proposal system that caused the vote weight to be maintained even after the proposal is removed or deleted.
Hm, nothing interesting here to review. All is well. Any other fixes the public want to add to the proposal system? Now is your chance.
HF10
HF10 is basically witnesses getting a pay raise for running nodes and such.
BIP0005 sacrifices DAO funding from the inflatio to be redirected to witnesses instead and BIP0006:
This BIP seeks to flatten the witness reward curve through minor witness rewards distribution changes. Overall, witnesses across all ranks will see a decent bump in their pay.
"no reward regulation" Right.
ANYWAYS
HF11
BIP0007
Disable a witness automatically after missing x blocks in x day(s).
BIP 0008
Remove all witness votes from a witness after being disabled for x day(s).
BIP 0009
Deletion of disabled witnesses after being disabled for x day(s).
My question for all of these is how many is x days. Either way I see this as a good thing. Especially #08 and #09.
There is alot of vote weight still on for disabled witnesses long past overdue.
I would add bip to reestablish proxy voting since its removal in a previous HF. Not many know what to vote for and just vote blindly. Having someone they can trust who pays more attention to what witnesses do.
HF12
BIP 0010
Automatic removal of delegation after a period of 1 year. The goal is to avoid severe cases of abuse that are existing on other chains in situations where the original user is no longer active or deceased.
This would mean users would have to renew thwir delegations after 1 year. But it's not really their rightfull call to remove delegations right? Afterall, it's not their account to force upon their will. If a perso delegates that is their choice. As well when the remove it.
Not your keys, not your car.
How would you tell if they are no longer active? What if they go away for a few years and come back to see their assets washed away to oblivion? (see my comment on this)
My last question regarding if its ethical was ignored. Not surprised.
Hf13
No need to go into detail here, ita just fixed to increase the speed of transactions
Hf14
BIP 0015
Burning the assets of exchanges that did not honor the BLURT airdrop.
Which exchanges? There really isn't much to choose from that blurt has i exchanges. Why penalize them for not receiving the airdrop? It's voluntary no?
BIP 0016
Burning assets of dormant accounts.
See last link above of my comment on this.
I have nothing more to add and comment on. Seems symbionts post already has some more heads turning in their comments so I'm off to reading those.
Cheers everyone.
The last stages of a collapsing socialist system.... and that's not including all the 'behind the scenes' shenanigans - threats of withdrawing funds and crashing the price, if there is no 'reward' for them staying - that kind of thing - you get the idea.
It is NOT a social media blockchain platform - it IS a token printing scheme with a siphoning off into $'s - while the hopium is sold hard (to keep all the plates spinning).
It think it's all great !...- a perfect microcosm of 'stakeholder capitalism' - aka the WEF idea.
The end result is baked in (barring some non existent new tech).
I've tried to use this info off blockchain, but there really isnt much of market, going off my efforts - no one is interested in crypto, except cryptoholics and those with a gambling addiction of some kind.
The question then becomes - if you cant get rewarded for good content, and work ethic (did I mention socislist construct? lol)....what's the best way forwards to profit from it?
Off platform, not much in respects to crypto.
Using it a comaprison about the WEF bullshit - maybe.
Not only from it being, essentially a corrupt structural/system construct - but also from an anthropological/ psychological/behavioral one...(far more interesting as oyu watch the shift is behaviors, all stemming from the structure...
Hopefully there's money in writing about that thar shite !
....We'll see.
Either way, treat it as a financial vehicle, not a forum of quality content, entertaining banter, or much else, really.
Depending on tim eof collapse (Im going for 2024 elections in US, or sooner if 'they' can't keep a handle of the bond market.
All crypto (in it's current format) s going to pretty much nil - imo, until tied to gold/commodities....imo.
Dpos will be like 9/11, but in reverse - WTC 7 -dpos - being the first to drop. 'Pull it'....
And then the bigger POS coins and POW, shortly afterwards.
I 100% agree with this statement
Overall actually.
I'll be trying to get into substack more fro. Now in in regards to getting some capital from my efforts. I ain't making shiz here. But the laughter is paying off. Tis a nice circus show lol 😆
....substacks, patreon, subscribestar, (pinepage has closed down)
At least they are more free market aligned (supply, demand, price), and not authoritarian top down financial idiocy.
Exxxxxxxxxxxxactly !
I forgot if I have your email addy or not ?.... (apologies).
yayogerardo@protonmail.com
Cheers - I sent you an email just to log it down, so that I know I have it.
....oh, in the meantime (see previous reply...)
I have a fun idea !...(possibly)...lol
BIP 001
Everything is great, but you also forgot that this solution on Steem meant that bots earned the most on this curve and ordinary users who allocated votes earned less because no normal user was waiting for the magic window that allowed them to earn the most. The effect was that this alleged "encouraging other users to vote ended with Voting trails and the delegation of resources to bots.
They called it increasing user activity and reducing self-voting, but the truth is that the bots were the same as before and there were voting trials and others. Who was losing?
For example, people like me and authors. I lost because I read the articles, never voted for myself as a matter of principle and used the Socialnetwork for its intended purpose.
Often I found articles only on the 7th day after their publication (because im not all the time on socialmedia) and I voted in the last hours not to increase anything but to reward the author. The problem is that the author only lost money because the reward for the last hours was poor.
this also discouraged people from looking for older articles, so everyone focused on the newest ones
Who gained? bots and their wealthy owners who found it profitable to have a VPS or a server just for the bots, because with amounts ranging from several hundred thousand dollars, it pays off.
In my opinion, the conclusions of the people who came up with this strange modification are simply autistic and detached from reality, because the whole topic can be summarized as follows:
Whatever you do, greedy people who want profit and want to drain the platform will find a way. Because if someone is an idiot, no rules will change it.
It's like the firearms ban. There were supposed to be fewer shootings and it was supposed to be safer, and it actually is! The problem is that it's "safer" because criminals (including the government and the police) are armed and do whatever they want, and ordinary people have nothing to defend themselves and live in a mentality of fear and submission.
And there are actually fewer shootings, because when someone jumps out with a gun to steal your car, instead of taking out his gun and shooting back, the person meekly gives the car back. But yeah... do we want to live in a world where people let criminals do whatever they want with them?
It's the same with 99% of oddities and various complicated curves or other complex systems. It's just that society usually turns against ordinary users and those who have time and money to do calculations, write bots or other things will find a way to milk the system anyway.
Here you have, for example, an article by a guy on leofinance who writes what happened after leofinance reintroduced linear prize allocation on its token and how it is seen by a healthy voting user who does not use bots and votes manually:
https://www.publish0x.com/bala/my-curation-rewards-on-leofinance-started-increasing-after-l-xzyvgwg
In my opinion, the biggest drawback of this system, such as Steem hive or Blurt, is the fact that votes do not matter after the settlement window and articles do not earn money after this time. This means that instead of quality, everyone goes for quantity, and instead of looking for something they are interested in reading (try to find it among all this spam, good luck!), people are looking for something to vote for. This, in my opinion, is also the reason why we have such a flood of spam in general and why, for example, we needed such an idiotic solution as Downvotes to fight it..
And this is why I coted for you as a witness also. Honest replies. And direct too. Shows respect.
Your correct on all points. Those things did continue and people with greed will find a way to rig the system dry.
Dpos imo is a failed experiment. After 10 years, it doesn't matter what we tweak in the code. If given a window, most of the the big players in charge will take most advamtage of it as shown in steemit and hive. And here too.
As for the authors getting their share, I suggest opening up a donate option for thwir valued work. They will make way more that way instead of relying upon votes for profit.
And ty for that example I'll look into it aswell.
You been on these chains for a while i see. what is your overall opinion about dpos in general?
Thanks for explaining that, I have never grasped what is going on with these blockchains. I did pretty well on Steemit, and very well on Hive, but it's safe to say Blurt has been an investment lemon. It's got to the point where I'd just like to see an uncensored and creative platform where people can share their content. If the rewards are nothing more than a means to help ration out resources but not really of much value, so be it, the pattern on each blockchain seems to be that attempting to control all the rewards leads to crap content and the platform goes nowhere.
Let's face it, PeakD is a killer platform in terms of design - yes it smokes Blurt - but it is unusable for anyone who doesn't play by their rules.
After 9ish years of dpos, reading and reading and reading, much stuck with me in memory mostly. Granted I didn't write much on the chain as others, but I was always there, on discord and other chats with "serious" players yapping away how happy they were to steal from the lower classes and abusing the DV with no accountability. Playing on their level, economically speaking, was out of my league. But my mouth, when it craved to speak, made many angry and was banned multiple times from their own discord servers. I never really invested 1 penny into any of these chains. Tbh I have collected in total around 1k USD from these chains and soent most of it on paying bills and feeding my pets only. And one time an icecream cone. A big one... 9 scoops...
Curated by @ultravioletmag