As far as I am aware, the only way that could possibly work would be to essentially stop paying out STEEM for posts and to only pay out SBDs but even that doesn't guarantee that SBD will go to $1USD. @dan made it clear recently that SBD has a fixed low point of $1USD but no fixed high point.
I'm not 100% clear of what is being proposed here. Is the idea to force the internal market to artificially change the rate of exchange between steem and SBD? The external markets would not adopt that automatically, so I'm not sure how that would work in the real world. Such a plan also opens the possibility to massive collusion and manipulation within those who decide on the fork system, since they can decide in advance how to change the process in future and then build up reserves of one of the tokens, ready to cash in on a later fork - this is exactly what happens in the non crypto world.
thanks - I listened to about 25 minutes of it and enjoyed it so far - it's good to hear time and aggroed talk on this. that said, i still don't understand how this process would work in reality. if someone holds $100SBD that are valued at $1000USD and suddenly $1USD of STEEM is worth $1SBD through force in Steem's internal system then wouldn't that result in a rapid sale of steem for SBDs on the internal market, with the SBDs then being dumped on the external markets - making the holders of STEEM that use Steem as a utility suddenly able to make massive profits and then everyone else on the external markets losing out hugely? Maybe I am misunderstanding the mechanics here, but the details appear to be being missed out - either that or the idea is madness.. lol
it sounds like the plan is to artificially fix the exchange rate of Steem to SBD in the internal market, ignoring the price feeds generated by witnesses.. but since that hasn't been specifically stated, i accept there may be a completely different mechanism involved that i haven't understood and which hasn't been fully described.
Yes, that is correct as far as can be publicly seen, but Dan basically invented the Steem system and has only commented on how it functions. Is it possible that he is trying to make Steem crash to replace it with his own new version on EOS? yes!
He commented something like that. Ned flagged his post about EOS and also I think Dan think Steemit become too centralized. Also saw Dan flagging @haejin posts to 0, in same time Ned commenting that @haejin and @berniesanders fight is good to Steemit community because it gets attention to Steemit. Two opposite views.
I probably agree with dan about centralisation - I'm intereted to see how EOS plays out - I suspect he might run into exactly the same problem with Block one as he did with Steemit Inc. - though maybe their agreements are different to prevent that.
I think the solution is in the governance not in the strict rules.. that is where i disagree with @dan, he wants to impose what is right, and people wont accept anything imposed...
Remember the keyword here is: Concensus
The parable of the King in the little prince explains simply: You can not impose something that people are not willing to accept.
As far as I am aware, the only way that could possibly work would be to essentially stop paying out STEEM for posts and to only pay out SBDs but even that doesn't guarantee that SBD will go to $1USD. @dan made it clear recently that SBD has a fixed low point of $1USD but no fixed high point.
https://steemit.com/steem/@aggroed/still-in-defense-of-a-high-sbd-why-witnesses-should-not-implement-steem-to-sbd-conversions-now
I'm not 100% clear of what is being proposed here. Is the idea to force the internal market to artificially change the rate of exchange between steem and SBD? The external markets would not adopt that automatically, so I'm not sure how that would work in the real world. Such a plan also opens the possibility to massive collusion and manipulation within those who decide on the fork system, since they can decide in advance how to change the process in future and then build up reserves of one of the tokens, ready to cash in on a later fork - this is exactly what happens in the non crypto world.
@timcliff explains it in this video. From 5:00 mark
https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=565&v=pNpR6Iz5ndg
thanks - I listened to about 25 minutes of it and enjoyed it so far - it's good to hear time and aggroed talk on this. that said, i still don't understand how this process would work in reality. if someone holds $100SBD that are valued at $1000USD and suddenly $1USD of STEEM is worth $1SBD through force in Steem's internal system then wouldn't that result in a rapid sale of steem for SBDs on the internal market, with the SBDs then being dumped on the external markets - making the holders of STEEM that use Steem as a utility suddenly able to make massive profits and then everyone else on the external markets losing out hugely? Maybe I am misunderstanding the mechanics here, but the details appear to be being missed out - either that or the idea is madness.. lol
it sounds like the plan is to artificially fix the exchange rate of Steem to SBD in the internal market, ignoring the price feeds generated by witnesses.. but since that hasn't been specifically stated, i accept there may be a completely different mechanism involved that i haven't understood and which hasn't been fully described.
I also don't understand it all. I'm on 50:00 mark and they are still talking about Steem/SBD price.
If I'm correct Dan and Ned are in some sort of fight. I heard Dan said he don't want be associated with Steemit any more.
Yes, that is correct as far as can be publicly seen, but Dan basically invented the Steem system and has only commented on how it functions. Is it possible that he is trying to make Steem crash to replace it with his own new version on EOS? yes!
He commented something like that. Ned flagged his post about EOS and also I think Dan think Steemit become too centralized. Also saw Dan flagging @haejin posts to 0, in same time Ned commenting that @haejin and @berniesanders fight is good to Steemit community because it gets attention to Steemit. Two opposite views.
I probably agree with dan about centralisation - I'm intereted to see how EOS plays out - I suspect he might run into exactly the same problem with Block one as he did with Steemit Inc. - though maybe their agreements are different to prevent that.
I think the solution is in the governance not in the strict rules.. that is where i disagree with @dan, he wants to impose what is right, and people wont accept anything imposed...
Remember the keyword here is: Concensus
The parable of the King in the little prince explains simply:
You can not impose something that people are not willing to accept.I don't really know exactly what he is planning in that regard.. Ultimately he will be presenting a model and can change it if people don't like it.