I can offer a brief point about the economics of Synereo. Synereo lets the user have ultimate control, as there is no company such as Steemit who can control certain aspects. It's an attention economy in the pure sense where users can determine for example via social/smart contract: "In order to reach my attention with your communications, you must pay me in arbitrary number of amps". It means amps will definitely have value if people value the attention of valuable people, and because as we know on Steemit how scarce attention is, the economic for Synereo make a lot of sense.
Advertisers would have to buy amps which immediately creates a market for amps. Steemit wants people to buy Steem Power which function similar to amps but amps are much more flexible in how they can be used while Steem Power is sort of fixed in it's place to be used how it's being used and while you can expand the uses of it, it's not as generalized as amps. There is probably more to be said and I'm not an economist, but I do know Dan Larimer has known about Synereo for a long time and the whole attention economy amp model as well, and for his own reasons he decided on the Steem model.
I think because there are some advantages to the Steem model. It's easier to understand Steem. Synereo is way more radical, where nobody really understands the full potential of it, but at this time people fashion it as a Facebook killer. It has potential to be far bigger than Facebook if it can capture users, but because it's so hard to make sense of, and because the interface so far is not intuitive, it's not a guarantee it will be anything.
Core points
The Synereo attention economy treats the human mind as a sacred resource, where attention is the most scarce resource in the human economy. Everything resolves around attention, which makes perfect sense in an information/knowledge economy, but I would guess each person will have attention which has a different value as determined by reputation or something else, and some parts of it are too complicated for me to explain in a single post.
Synereo has user adjusted privacy, may be geared more toward Facebook style communication, may not be a direct competitor to Steemit unless Steemit is trying to evolve into a Facebook rather than a Reddit/Ebay killer. Integration between the two platforms might be a good idea so you can make it easy for a person to make an account on Steemit and use that to copy their profile to Synereo, or from Synereo copy their profile onto Steemit, all blog posts included.
exactly.
Agreed that for the moment Steem is a firehose, one-size-fits-all.
It doesn't necessarily follow that Synereo has a better solution for maximizing the relevance of attention. I encourage you to read this and this.
False on ultimate control. We can't publish anything, even encrypted, to a group of followers and be guaranteed to remain in control of the information.
We are free to use different clients on the Steem blockchain, not necessarily the Steemit UI. It is true that the Steem blockchain's license does not allow forking.
You assume that attention is valuable, but existing advertising targeting has shown attention is not valuable for advertising. I pointed this out many months ago on Bitcointalk, when I analyzed Synereo and decided it would fail.
Our attention is most valuable to ourselves, but the way to monetize this is apparently not via advertising!
That is a crucial point. What makes social networking valuable to the user, is they are in control over what is important to them that which draws them to that activity.
A deep understanding of marketing and technology is necessary to create the mass market product. I've done mass market software two or three times in my career.
Now I am going to do it again.
Strawman. Synereo is user owned, at the level of attention based ownership. Steem is owned by miners, by Steemit and from what I can see didn't take attention scarcity into account which explains the issue with curation.
Human attention is the last scarce resource in digital society. We all compete for the attention of other people because we recognize how scarce that attention is. Advertisements steal attention and don't pay people anything in exchange and spam is a perfect example.
I see Synereo as more than just a product. It's a Social Computer and it runs on attention as a resource, just as there are other resources like storage, computation and bandwidth.
Obviously I was referring to control over what happens to the content we publish.
The Synereo AMP is also a blockchain that is owned by the token holders and/or miners as is the case for Steem.
You are trying to claim that the user has more control in Synereo, but that is far from certain. We can also create different clients to interact with the Steem blockchain. There is no reason one couldn't build a client model that mimicked Synereo's cascade model of content push/pulling, and only put some of the content on the Steem blockchain.
Since you are promulgating vaporware, we can speculate that anything is possible in the future on either system.
You've drunk the Koolaid. You'd be kicked out of the venture capitalist's office if that was your explanation of a business model.
You've yet to tell me how you can monetize this nebulous resource you name 'attention'. Or tell me how attention as a resource will translate into a popular activity.
exactly: " by Steemit and from what I can see didn't take attention scarcity into account which explains the issue with curation."
Read the licence. I did because I built a witness node. It trademarks the names only.
I mean we aren't allowed by the license fork the Steem blockchain's code.