Thanks. I'm thinking of writing on article titled "A Capatilistic Model On A Decentralized Platform". Steemit actually represents an incredibly interesting experiment in capitalism, something that's never been done before: the monetization of your attention. Does it create "quality"? That is left to be seen. But what's fascinating is that capitalism in its purest and most idealistic form is inherently decentralized with the concept of a "free market". Any regulation of this market takes us further away from the ideal. But you're right. I'm trying very hard not to be biased. I'm only pointing out what it is. Not what it should be.
You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
The media knows viewer attention is currency too. That's why we all see headlines that turn your stomach, they do not care. It's all about money, advertising and that's it. The news died a long time ago.
i wrote an article in a similar vein a few days ago - not so much the capitalism metaphor, but more of steemit as a metaphor for the world economy as a whole.
It is fascinating, to say the least. As a sociologist my initial task is to figure out what the best way to collect data is, to answer these questions - the database and the various reports are an obvious starting point, but not enough! I'd love to have the time to interview/ survey some of the people with dead accounts - the 90% in other words.
I think BS above has a point, but I really don't want to wade into that particular war.
On current evidence I'm leaning towards the idea that linear rewards and unregulated self-voting are terrible foundation-principles!
Steemit hasntcreated shit. This is just a ponzy scheme, dont try to call it anything other than that.
This not Capitalism, this is Anarchy. And as such, is a fascinating experiment in human organisation.
good answer. very interesting discussion.
Uhm, that would be a big NO. What Steem is is Crony Capitalism. A few poweful voters (whales), upvote posts that are usually CRAP. For this to be TRUE capitalism, each vote would be worth exactly the same. A post getting 100 individual votes is more valuable than a post that gets one vote from one whale. The emphasis should be on content creators. Without content, you just end up with what quite honestly feels like a giant ponzi scheme.
You pegged it. I am looking forward reading your article. I once made a post about why we have self-voting option. Yes because it is how it works in real life too. So, is there no solution to this problem?
I cannot express how pleased I am to hear you say these things. I have been trying for ages to slowly build an audience with serious unique content and it is unfortunate that no matter what the platform, there will always be those whose only "art" is gaming the system. Great comments, following you now!