You don't understand where you are. This blockchain is a stakeholder capitalism but in a better version than WEF version.
I've understood EXACTLY where I am - ever since a few months into steem.
....And fighting against communist authoritarianism ever since, if you hadn't noticed.
Ah, so it's the old 'it's just not the right kind of communism, we'll do it better!'....
Gothca!
This Dpos must be far cleverer than stupid me.
(as you can see from the prices crashing 90% from all time highs across all dpos platforms! lol...)
AT LEAST WE'VE CLEARED THAT UP.
let me get this right...
DPOS IS AN 'IMPROVED VERSION' OF THE WEF VERSION, OF 'STAKEHOLDER CAPITALISM'
(Shaking my head so much it's nearly falling off).
Your statement is worthy of a daily post, all by itself !!!
This is sure to attract more talented free market advocates, and creative users.
Honest.
Ever wondered why commie ideology (inc facism/corprtism, whatver - same shit), can never be openly expressed, but has to be brought in by subterfuge?
No sounds of coins dropping?...No smelling of any coffee?...
Stakeholders can share their portion of the reward pool with you by voting on your post or they can write 10 posts themselves and claim all rewards for themselves, it depends on what people have in their heads
Gotcha !
Nothing like a race to the bottom to get that good old 'stakeholder capitalism' going. (obviously the improved version over the anal schwabs version - because people are much cleverer that nature, don'tcha know?..lol)
"...The problem is not with this blockchain, the problem is with what people have in their heads...."
What's in your head? I haven't noticed that you are a capitalist, you don't accumulate huge amounts of BLURT Power, I would say rather that you sell everything on the free market..
Capitalism is a term created by marx.
Free markets is the correct term (no free markets without responsibility with capital allocation), ego corporatism etc is NOT 'capitalism' it;s cronyism.
Your twisted perception of what capitalism is, is on you and Educate yourself. (I have been trying but everyone thinks I'm just complaining lolol)
Free market systems has nothing to do with me accumulating - or not accumulating - anything. Don't deflect, it's looks like your trying to be evasive.
It's called a principle.
You and your commie needs to inquire into everyone else's business!...although this also a mindset prerequisite for a wealth transfer from the producers to the parasite class, I suppose...
I would say rather that you sell everything on the free market..
There is no free markets in crypto. (just the illusion of one)... Please educate yourself on simple economic principles
(you know, 'supply and demand' and 'price discovery'...'products and services' - that kinda thing).
So, are you a commie/authoritarian lover ? (call it communism, fascism, corporatism, same shit, just different masks to cover up the need to control and wealth transfers)
Sorry for asking direct questions, I know all collectivists naturally detest honesty, it shows truth - and any collectivist ideology is based in fundamental lies.
***Definitions of authoritarianism/com/facs/corp... - a person who desires to see top down control and rules, to decide everything for them and make them feel safe (or get richer off the back of those who create stuff with parasitical methods).
....Or...
...are you an adult ?
(you can't be both, psychologically speaking).
A childs mal-adapted, egocentric psychology in an adults body = communism.
Emotionally immature, weak ego formation, weak boundaries, and the need for external validation to prop up their internal psychological weakness (commies love the mob/the collective! !).
or ....if NOT an adult (in the psycologcial sense)...
... do you EVER want to be, an adult ?
Love is being a sovereign adult, not a child in an adults body wishing to control others, just to stop them from feeling scared and vulnerable....
EDIT: Just look at on wef webiste at th epeople who endorse anal scwabs 'stakeholder capitalism' - then tell me you don't feel
a)cheated
b) stupid
c) both of the above.
( which can be fixed if you have the courage)
Satya Nadella, CEO, Microsoft
“Klaus Schwab has encouraged his readers for decades to keep their eyes on the future because when we set our gaze on the horizon, our minds can better plan for the obstacles and opportunities before us. In Stakeholder Capitalism, Professor Schwab invites us also to look side-to-side, to the many constituencies in the public and private sectors that through partnership and collaboration can make the future brighter, more inclusive and more sustainable”
Fareed Zakaria, Host of CNN's Fareed Zakaria GPS
Ana Botín, , Group Executive Chairman, Banco Santander
Alexander De Croo, Prime Minister of Belgium
Angélique Kidjo, Musician and UNICEF
Brian Moynihan, CEO, Bank of America
N. Chandrasekaran, Executive Chairman, Tata Sons
Mark Rutte, Prime Minister of the Netherlands (ex PM, now head of NATO)
ffs....
Stakeholder
capitalismsocialism sounds like a beautiful idea until one realizes that only about one percent of the people on the planet are recognized as stakeholders.It turns into an outright joke when one realizes that taxpayers are rarely considered stakeholders ... they are just bag holders.
Speaking of bag-holders I am off to check on my hive-engine account to look at all of the pretty bags I've acquired.
lolololol - sell sell sell ! lolol
You get it....
I've never understood those who think this is a free market when the value is measured and traded by the fiat currencies this is supposed to free us from.
We are chained to the Federal Reserve (insert your central bank here) who can print the money out of thin air and buy as much as they want, the way they have been extracting actual resources.
....thinking can be hard for people...and some just refuse to do it.
Blurt Foundation?
btw, do you have any news regarding scheduled HF's? We are still printing too much BLURT, in a situation where only a few people are buying and the rest are selling witnesses will be closing their nodes soon
Hah hah, if you say so. I see a huge difference, as central banks have lots of folks with guns forcing my participation and enslavement. One can choose not to open the Blurt blog up and not participate. No one with guns will be coming by to force it. 😜
I'm not in the loop. I figure you are more in touch than I am, as I walked away years ago until the beginning of the year. I assumed given the absence of the Foundation from participating openly here your collective mind group had reached an agreement with theirs until you took your shot just now at them.
I'm wondering if you're feeling cognitive dissonance right now as you've been at it with Lucy saying how great this system is, that it's a more perfect version of free market capitalism.
Then here you are saying the opposite and saying it is so centralized and being extracted from by those at the top that it will be driving those participating in the infrastructure into insolvency.
You took a shot at Lucy saying he wasn't a capitalist as he hadn't accumulated what you deem worthy holdings. Yet using your comment to me here, one would be insane to invest in what you say is a sinking ship.
Please pick a lane. I'm much kinder in ways than Lucy, and if you had committed this presenting both sides as the truth despite their opposition he would have skewered you.
Just curious, but why haven't any of you with deeper pockets who've invested in the product (tokens) taken firm action to add to the blockchain instead of parasitically relying upon the Foundation which you liken to a central bank?
When Khrom talks about all of these things that "could" be possible here but aren't, that finger points a lot at folks like you. You're one of the top investors here. The burden is on you to protect your investment, to solidify it, and make it grow.
I love how so many talk of the freedom of crypto, how it will free us, how it allows us to create, blah blah blah.
Yet almost every single person (including you) reveals that you are only willing to go so far in this endeavor as you measure it in values of fiat, hah hah.
You are only as free with this chain by your above admission as others who set this up and maintain it will allow you and the others to be, that's what you said to me.
The part about not affording nodes and closing down, that is the free market principle right there, based on the reliance on the fiat system.
There is no free market to this as you concede, and based on your and the other large stakeholder's actions to date, this will all collapse if the Foundation decides to turn off their tools (front end, coding, etc.).
We were told that this blockchain is decentralized. How is it possible that the foundation can shut it down at any time? I always thought that even if the foundation goes away this blockchain will continue to work. I hope you are wrong, because otherwise it is ...
Edit
I apologize for the mentions, but this is a fundamental question, the answer to which every witness and investor should know
@saboin @megadrive @rycharde @jacob @khrom and all witnesses
this blockchain can run on anyone's computers, but someone has to host it and keep it running. So far, of the people who know what and how to maintain the entire infrastructure and are also involved in the project and active enough to constantly improve and improve something, only the foundation's team is catching on. And we need to improve it because all software is moving forward and over time some things become incompatible. The second issue is that, for example, @saboin and his team are constantly taking steps to both reduce the size of the nodes and speed up their installation. Because, for example, without their actions, the launch and synchronization of the current node would currently take a week.
If we gathered and built an alternative team that would shoulder the burden of Blurt's technical support if the current one leaves, then yes. will be able to continue working.
Blurt has one drawback. It was created with mass adoption in mind. If there were 100k active users, we would probably have 5 or 6 groups ready to take on maintaining the network in the event of a "W". But on a small scale it's bad.
There are two problems with such a small number of users:
If blurt was priced at $0.1 and not $0.002, talented programmers would immediately flock to it. The problem is that no one with enough qualifications, apart from the original team for whom it is "their baby", is not willing to lift a finger when it is not. Especially when blurts from running a witness node are barely enough to maintain the servers and blurts from DAO are barely enough to pay for one project and at penny rates. The depth of the market, however, leaves much to be desired. The problem is that if no one does anything and develops the blurt, it will only lose users and position in the network, and consequently the Team will eventually abandon it because no one will pay for maintaining something that only brings losses and the network will be shut down .
So the answer to your question is:
Theoretically yes, in practice, given the current situation in which there are few people willing to develop the project and if, for example, Sabion and the team had to abandon the project suddenly for any reason, the answer is No.
For example, I do not have the appropriate knowledge to run and maintain it all. I have potential, I learn in my free time and I already know how simple things work, but I am far from Mars to the knowledge and understanding of Saboin ;] If I had, let's say, a year and could make a living from it, I would probably catch up enough to do so. I would find it very difficult to maintain something like this. The question is, who would like to pay at least USD 2,000 a month for my living and education until then?
Decentralization is an illusion. Those who contribute the most will always want to be rewarded and have a say comparable to their contribution. There will always be those who deserve more, and each of those points contributes to a centralization.
In theory, this is true. However, the lack of anything being run and maintained dependably outside of what they provide isn't happening. No one wants to fund the structure and development. The Foundation can't make others invest the time and money to duplicate and improve what they have been doing.
So it's logical to conclude if they ever decided to walk away from all of this, no one else would do it, or it would already be happening. It happened on Steem, it's ongoing at Hive. Aggroed has built atop the Steem/Hive blockchain as well as there are multiple front ends independently owned. Here, nothing.
Even your comment to me about inflation making running witness nodes insolvent because of the costs involved is an admission of this.
I fought hard to push this chain over the top. Without the downvotes this should be a no brainer in comparison to the other chains.
The rewarding of all of these low effort boring posts is also digging the grave. I mentioned earlier to Khrom that no one who has a following or wants to spread their message will see a reason to post here after seeing trending or hot. Then a look and seeing no one even interacts in comment sections.
All the way around, impediments that have not gotten better, only worse.
But with no real exchange listings of value, creating a difficulty in both adoption as well as adoption by more investors, to no one seeking to put their time and money into infrastructure as we saw Aggroed do it seems this at best is treading water till there is no more treading.
The silence of their reply is deafening loud.
The blockchain itself will continue running for as long as there are enough witnesses to keep it going.
If we shut down the frontends or the various services that the frontends depend on (image uploader, image servers, image proxy, RPC nodes, APIs, et cetera) then there would be no way to interact with the blockchain except for witnesses and other computer users who can use the CLI wallet.
Right now there are a few alternative frontends, but all of them depend on the other services that are currently only provided by the core team. Anyone could run their own and take over in the event that the core team decided to pull the plug (which I don't believe is likely to happen any time soon).
For a while at the beginning, those services were run by one of the developers. He left Blurt in December of 2020, and turned off his services in February of 2021. Those who were here at the time can tell you about it. Blurt was barely functional for a few months. No images showed up on the frontends. People could not upload images. Notifications didn't work. I was brought on the core team to fix these problems and run the infrastructure on behalf of the founders. It took me a few months, but I eventually got everything back up and running.
If we were to shut down the infrastructure, someone else could just take over and host the services themselves.
But anyway, we don't plan on shutting down the services anytime soon. And in the event that it would come to that, I'd be more than happy to help anyone who wants to take over to get setup.
And if someone wants to setup their own parallel infrastructure, I can help them with that.
thanks, good explanation
Almost nothing has changed. I understand that the "foundation" printed its stake to protect blockchain from hostile takeover. This was a mistake, it turned out that the same results could have been achieved by making changes in the governance system.
The only thing that has changed is that I have accepted the existence of a unregistered foundation so I am not going back to old discussions that lead to nothing.
And, yes, the system is great, much better than the one on Hive or Steem
Has this blockchain done anything that WEF has done or plans to do?
Are you a fool? Just because WEF uses the term "stakeholder capitalism" doesn't at all mean that we can't use it. Calling anyone who disagrees with you a communist is pathetic. You sound like another guy with a ten dollar account who wants to rule everything here
Reward obedience and conformity over independent voices.
Rewards laziness, over work and effort....
....lets start with those.
...Kinda sounds just like how the old soviet union/mid to late 20th china China operated, doesn't it ?
(and now, the west)
Ad hominems - (logical fallacies)... the 'go to' place when you have nothing intelligent to say.
Do you find the term commie offensive?
Why?
Does it cause a feeling of guilt/shame? - endorsing communist principles under the name of DPoS could do this... (this is an opportunity to grow if you have the courage - your journey, no one elses.)
I refer to ANY authoritarian mindset as commie/fasict/corporatism, whatever -it's all the same, just different masks - but 'commie' seems to trigger the guilty mind more than the other words.
https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2021/sep/28/stakeholder-capitalism-communism-disguise/
That's enough for me, I'm not reading any further
Typical communist attitude. Others get upvotes and I don't. You have wasted eight years for criticizing graphene blockchains for only one reason.... lol I'm sorry for you
I understand totally. It must be awkward.
Psychological pain can exhibit itself in a refusal to observe truths, that cause cognitive dissonance.
This is projection.
Victim mentality, externalized.
Bless...
The only question that remains...
WHAT ACTION WOULD AN EMOTIONALLY IMMATURE, COGNITIVELY UNCOMFORTABLE, INTELLECTUALLY AND PHILOSOPHICALLY CONFUSED, LOVER OF STAKEHOLDER CAPITALISM', DO NOW..?
A HISSY FIT AND THE USE OF ANY PERCEIVED POWER THEY HAVE, TO EXPRESS THAT LITTLE CHILD HISSY FIT - WOULD BE MY GUESS.
(children have no concept of shame or self control, via emotional expressions).