IT'S ABOUT 14 years ago that I marched in opposition to the war in Iraq. The sun was shining and there was a palpable sense of solidarity and purpose in the crowd. Newcastle isn’t a big town for protests, so seeing 20,000 people walking down Hunter Street was a new and exhilarating experience.
When I watched the news that night and saw that up to a million people around Australia had risen in protest, the feeling I’d been nurturing all day felt like it was being confirmed: We are the people and we are powerful.
Except we weren’t.
That quote is from an article I wrote last year, Power in Australia: The rich rule and the poor can help themselves, where I sought to take a hammer to the notion that 'the people' hold any reasonable political power, and that Australian ideals of egalitarianism still hold as true as the used to.
For those to young to remember, lots of people all around the world hit the streets to voice their opposition to the steaming geopolitical, economic and humanitarian clusterfuck that our military adventures in the Middle East have turned out to be. By and large, these protests achieved very little. I then go on to talk about some of the ways in which the wealthy and politically-well-connected run everything, and that what normal people want, or the actions they take, generally don't make much difference due to the effect that money (and the marketing/media time it buys) has on how power actually functions in Australia.
'Why are you re-hashing an old article?', I hear you ask. It's not just that I'm coming up on my 15 year anniversary of being part of something that failed to really achieve anything. It's that Steemit, and indeed the whole Steem blockchain, makes me think about power, and that much of what I've observed in 'real' politics (if there is such a thing) may apply here, albeit in not quite the same way.
Obviously, I'm not talking about power as in electricity, but power as in the ability to do things, to achieve, by whatever means, ones needs, wants and desires. Bertrand Russell defined power as "the production of intended effects" - the ability to have your intentions - whether they be needs or wants, satisfied. Of two people with the same desires, says Russell, the one who can achieve more of them has the most power.
Once you get this far, the analysis of the politics of most places, and certainly most western democracies, is pretty predictable. In my assessment, the following is depressingly plausible in Australia at least:
- Your vote doesn't count for much unless you live in a marginal/swing electorate. And even if your chosen representative wins, there's no guarantee that they or their party won't make a pig's ear of it. Nor do your elected representatives really give two shits about the letters normal people have written them.
- If, however, you can buy into the political process by donating $100,000 to the right people, or by having the money to run your own series of nation-wide attack ads, you opinion, no-matter how insane or self-serving it is, is suddenly amazingly important, and politicians will fall over themselves to satisfy your desires.
- This concentration of power then generally serves looks after itself - e.g.: politicians who own lots of real-estate opposing changes to the law that might make property more affordable, or giving themselves and the wealthy who donate to them tax cuts, while at the same time screwing the rest of us.
- More money equals more ability to achieve ones desires, as well as an increased ability to avoid any negative consequences of transgressing society's laws or conventions.
The question is this: How does Steemit, and all the Steem-based systems, compare to this?
Like many newbies, I sometimes feel like my vote here doesn't count for much - and this applies to both my upvote and my witness-vote. I have even felt that this is true of all low Steem Power users, because even collectively our vote is dwarfed by the SP of even a single whale.
Luckily, unlike politics, it's easier to earn enough SP to make your vote gradually count for more over time. The whale/minnow dynamic will change over time too, once there are lots more users. We only have about 60-70,000 accounts active each day on Steemit, so gathering enough low-sp votes to effectively neutralise one whale-vote is really difficult - it would take 10,000 $0.01 votes to counter a single $100.00 vote. Getting 1 in 6 people to vote for something is a big ask!
But what if we had millions of daily users? Instead of needing 16% of people to vote one way to have an effect, you now only need maybe 0.5 - 1% of users - even the lowest SP - to vote collectively in order to boost or drop a post reward by $100. I haven't taken changes in the value of SBD into account, but you get the idea. Collectives communities or unions of steemians may eventually wield enough power to challenge any account, but only if enough people join.
Yes, having more money here on Steemit gives you a lot more power in the system. But in order for that investment to continue to give good returns, new money has to keep coming into the system. This means big players from other social media have to come across - and they are only going to do that if there is an audience for them. This means Steemit and everything that relies on the Steem ecosystem need to keep attracting and retaining new users. If there are no new users, there will be no new investment, and people will go crawling back to Facebook and Youtube in search of an audience. Unless investors want to lose out, they will come to realise this and learn to act accordingly.
The possibility of collective action, as well as the need for growth will produce increasing political-style pressures on the big players in this system, whether they are witnesses or not. The wrangling over post-payouts, bidbots, self-voting, and 6th-day voting is an early symptom of this - a forerunner of what is to come. My prediction of the day: You ain't seen nothin' yet!
A common criticism of existing political structures is that the state holds a monopoly on the legitimate use of violence, which it then misuses in order to maintain the positions of those in power. While there is no actual physical violence on Steemit, the act of flagging does inflict a penalty on those who receive them. A flag, or series of flags, from a high-SP user at full voting power can seriously alter the ability of the recipient to earn rewards on their posts. Is this violence per se? I'm not sure. But it is done without the consent of the recipient, and the threat of it could well be coercive in nature, so there are certain similarities.
The monopoly on this pseudo-violence on Steemit flows from both the vast disparity of SP and the reputation system. My flag is worth very little, and will not reduce the rep of anyone higher than 50. Me downvoting a whale is like a mosquito biting an actual real whale, except at least a real mosquito might get something out of the interaction. The analogy works in the other direction too - all small and delicate forms of life that fail to avoid a stray fin do not last long!
As was proven last year, even a random dude in the street can headbutt an ex-prime minister. I'm not sure the same is achievable here. In this sense, the monopoly (or, I should say, oligopoly) on the Steem analogue of violence is actually more complete than in broader life.
On one hand, people are generally well-conditioned to accept such coercion - given that it's how our political systems work. So people will put up with a lot of this - most users won't even give it a second thought. But, again, the 'powers that be' of Steem should be on notice. If a person doesn't like the coercive nature of government, it's actually very hard to avoid altogether. They have to try to change or dismantle current political structures, or at least move to a country with less oppressive laws. But, if someone finds the nature of power relations on Steemit coercive and oppressive, they can just stop posting, power down, and sell all their Steem and SBD. The ability to opt out of the Steem blockchain is much easier to exercise than to opt out of being governed by states in real life. If too many people were to choose that option, to leave the Steem blockchain, the experiment will fail and some investors will get seriously burned.
So, that's my rant for the day! Much of modern politics, and life in general, is subject to the whims of those with the most cash. And in some ways, Steem and Steemit replicate these inequalities. But even though the mechanisms whereby the system provides feedback to those holding power on Steemit are different in ways that might seem subtle, they are important too. The results of these differences will be exciting either way, and their ultimate end is not set in stone - at least not yet.
Thanks for reading. Upvotes, resteems and comments are always appreciated.
Thankyou for your service.
Interestingly, we originally had quadratic, instead of linear rewards; so posts were paid based on the square of the total vp used to upvote them.
Most posts would make less than 10c, but the best ones would pull in $12-15,000
A lot of people hated that and it was changed to linear a long time ago, giving a flatter reward structure.
The justification for quadratic rewards was that it was a mechanism to prevent self upvoting.
The bigger a payout became; the greater one's ability to affect the balance, up or down.
A user with a 50c 100% upvote now, would have had a 5c vote on a low value post, and a $5 vote on a high value post.
People know that their 50c downvote won't hurt big abusers; and choose to just upvote themselves that 50c instead.
Under quadratic rewards, the incentives shift and they choose between downvoting a big, abusers post $5, or upvoting themselves 5c.
I'm amazed at how quickly the community dispensed with quadratic rewards; as it was our only real bulwark against the kind of abuse we're seeing now.
Thanks for your thoughtful comment @mattclarke. I can see how the quadratic rewards might have been problematic, but as you say, changing them as effectively just moved the problem to a different kind of behaviour.
The problem is that the people who will benefit most from self-voting are the ones with witness votes that actually matter.
I had noticed that - thought it was fairly well implied in what I wrote. But yes, in this sense, as I've said in a few comments when other people complain, Steem appears to have re-created the situation where the rich have the power to serve themselves. We simply don't have enough low SP users to overrun them right now. If we did, then they would have to at least try to keep us on-side.
It was well implied in your post, perhaps I didn't make my own point clear enough. I was trying to say that quadratic voting was done away with because those that wanted it gone were the ones who had the power to do away with it.
No matter how far you run, you can't escape the 1% eh?
Aha - I get you now, thanks.
you @samueldouglas deserve a resteem that's the best I can do for you my vote is worth a cent...
No problem - my vote isn't worth much yet either. Thanks for the resteem. I've followed you - let's call that even :)
What can one do? Ignore everybody and keep being yourself on Steemit. At first they will ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win. These words by Gandhi are true everywhere in life. On Steemit too.
UpSteemFollowed! Very well thought out post. Your thoughts on this are echoed by many minnows here, I'm sure
Amazing, I loved your analogy about the mosquito and the whale!
Good to keep challenging the system here. Its a money making system so its not going to be fair i guess.
Yes it is a money-making system. But do all money-making systems have to be unfair? More importantly, some crypto-evangelists see something like Steem as being a way run run our whole economy. If things ever get to that point, we'll wish we'd payed more attention to how fair it is in the early days (e.g.: right now).
Youre right. Very defeatist to dismiss it as being unfair therefore unchangeable.
All I can say here is damn straight! Well said my friend.
I've still been mulling over the way power works here on Steemit but I think I have been too focused on the way rewards pay out, that is, I have been too concerned with the monetisation of content, and yet, its the reputation (or score) that really holds the power and distributes tokens.
Thank you for writing about these mechanisms so clearly.
And thanks also for the reminder that the experiment is far from over.
cheers.
Great post Sam!
Not much has changed in Australia since the days of Ned Kelly in respect to the way power is wielded.
In the words of Peter Garrett
"The rich get richer and the poor get the picture"
It's a bit of a mess. Can we actually do better? I'd like to think so, but some days I wonder...
Interesting post @samueldouglas.
The way I look at it is most people are out to line their own pockets and they don't care who they stand on to get there.
Congratulations! This post has been upvoted from the communal account, @minnowsupport, by SamD from the Minnow Support Project. It's a witness project run by aggroed, ausbitbank, teamsteem, theprophet0, someguy123, neoxian, followbtcnews, and netuoso. The goal is to help Steemit grow by supporting Minnows. Please find us at the Peace, Abundance, and Liberty Network (PALnet) Discord Channel. It's a completely public and open space to all members of the Steemit community who voluntarily choose to be there.
If you would like to delegate to the Minnow Support Project you can do so by clicking on the following links: 50SP, 100SP, 250SP, 500SP, 1000SP, 5000SP.
Be sure to leave at least 50SP undelegated on your account.
Good information I agree that's
Fantastic post!
I was marching during that time, standing against the war profiteers was the right thing to do.
Is there an equivalent to war in flagging?
I think so, people are tired of the flag wars, but have small ability to effect change, the feeling is very disheartening, we have to accept it, or create massive unity.
Thanks @tawasi. I totally agree marching against the was was the right thing to do - just that it wasn't as effective as we'd have liked, and that's a sobering lesson.
People are tired of the flag wars. Are these analogous to wars though? I don't know. It's certainly the case that non-combatants can get caught in the crossfire.
Your Post Has Been Featured on @Resteemable!
Feature any Steemit post using resteemit.com!
How It Works:
1. Take Any Steemit URL
2. Erase
https://3. Type
reGet Featured Instantly � Featured Posts are voted every 2.4hrs
Join the Curation Team Here | Vote Resteemable for Witness
Congratulations you have been upvoted because you, or a friend left a post in the NewbieResteem Discord Chat channel post Promotion Box.
Wait til you start to run into the we need fees people. If we charged a fee to vote we would have less spam, and cheaters people...funny reads if you haven't seen them yet. If steemit does go down, it really is the investors that will get hurt, not so much the users, so that is sort of a plus.
We invite you to use our tag to connect with more of our members. To learn more visit: Come Join Us!!! (Newbie Resteem Initiative)
Lots of votes made possible due to the kindness of abh12345 and his Steemit Curation Leagues