In a more-mature system I would heartily agree. My concern about it in the current state of Steem is that I'm not sure stopping a hostile takeover is actually a good idea. I don't think the "hacker steals a lot of Steem and powers it up" scenario is very realistic, but the idea of someone buying several million dollars worth of Steem and becoming a major player is. And while that is a little scary, I'd need some convincing that it would necessarily be worse than the status quo.
You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
I am not concerned of the hackers doing this but, what does concern me is that it is relatively cheap to do at the moment for a corporation/government if it ever got to a point they felt it was worth it. The reason is that once that point comes, it is already too late because it can be done before the rules will change. I would say that anyone buying in very heavily to control a decentalized system is going to be negative for the platform in the long run although, it could turn it into youtube or facebook faster.
Agreed tc.
If someone wants to come along with $5m and buy themselves a seat in the top 20 - I'll throw them a vote myself.
Posted using Partiko Android