Percentages, numbers.. pff. Geek speak. No offense to all you geeks out there. Those numbers scare people though. "Fifty percent! This is an outrage!" They'll say. "Nobody will work for that!" They'll say.
.png)
Good luck with convincing me nobody wants to create content for Youtube. Google takes 45%. A small handful of people get rich, buy yachts, do cocaine, while expensive hookers feed them grapes off the vine, or something (I heard. I haven't actually been to those parties.)
So anyway, those folks fearing the fifty don't really know what they're talking about.
We all want to see some measure of success here. I'm a content producer, I know the business, and I know it well (or a least well enough to feel comfortable in my own skin, here.)
Look at youtube. Success there consists of thousands of upvotes on videos. Usually far more views than "likes" or "dislikes", but look at those votes. The video I'm watching now has over 30000 likes. That's what we're shooting for here, correct? Giving folks a reason to upvote content after consuming it? Sounds reasonable.
So if my work receives 30000 upvotes because people want to vote again, and I get a penny per vote, I'm doing better than I am now, even if all I get is a 10 percent cut.
Do I even make sense? 50%, at first, might be tough. More people willing to vote means more money though, eventually. In my mind, that's the only way it can work.
Some folks out there will end up spending thousands "donating" to their favorite streamers or content producers. They get nothing in return, monetarily. People seem to think this behavior is the way of the future. I personally think it's idiotic when we have a platform like this place. Why throw that money away like these content producers are strippers working the pole when one could simply INVEST in a platform, support their favorite content producers by voting, get a return on their initial investment, plus have the opportunity to pull out with no strings attached at any time. That's like buying a lifelong subscription to HBO, for free, plus you get paid. How is this simplicity consistently flying over so many heads? How do the professionals here have trouble cleaning up that thought and selling it? That's the future of the entertainment industry right there, in my mind, and it shouldn't be so damn hard to get it right.
BLAH! I could go on and on for days about this shit. I'm rambling, I guess. Whatever. I'll just hit post for the fuck of it. Enjoy.
50% might be a difficult number to swallow, but the economics are entirely different from ad revenue ones people are use to
Right now they're getting 75% of piss all because they're losing it all to stakers getting their vote rewards back one way or another. The EIP is offering 50% of hopefully almost the entire pie. It'll be up to us to communicate this to people so they understand.
50% of a pumpkin is more than 75% of a grape.
Haha lol . A quote i’ll probably put on my wall !
Did you? :p
Haha when you say something on the blockchain it stays there forever, I guess this is a point in case lol. I haven’t done that yet but I definitely still should !
I'd totally vote for your wall if you did that, man.
Haha when you say something on the blockchain it stays there forever, I guess this is a point in case lol. I haven’t done that yet but I definitely still should !
I think you meant to respond to @acidyo but got me instead.
You’re right. Thanks for letting me know !
I cracked up laughing the moment I read this.
I must have been hungry when I wrote that.
On Golos ( Steem fork ) people can choose any curation percentage inside the corridor pre-set by witnesses. By now it's from 51% to 90%.
Still it didn't eliminate vote bying.
tell me a little more about them, why are people selling votes if they can just farm the 90% curation posts? is it something to do with their curation curve?
what other economic parameters do they have? free downvotes? what's their reward curve?
what's the overall economy there like?
Most of parameters there could be changed by witnesses without any hardfork.
By now the majority of top-witnesses have voted for linear rewards and zero minutes early voting penalty.
The actual consensus state can be viewed on explorer https://explorer.golos.io
My understanding why people are still bying votes is some sort of addiction to be on the Trending.
And actually it isn't always 50/90, because vitnesses votes are "split" between something like 25/75, 50/50 and 25/90, consequently the parameters can change a few times a day depending of who from the reserve witnesses is taken into the calculation.
I see
Then I disagree strongly with linear rewards and no curation auction window and full priced downvotes
I somewhat disagree with a curation slider too
Putting these all together, I'm not at all surprised at their economic failure
I don't think this economic failure have anything to do with the curation model.
And actually the failure of falling from $0.30 to $0.05 as it's the case of Golos isn't so much different to falling from $6.00 to $0.3 as it's for Steem.
Love this.
This place needs more visionaries. Imagine you're sitting on the couch, enjoying your entertainment screen of choice. The device detects you're enjoying content, you've been glued to it for just the right amount of time. The device automatically upvotes, some money goes to those who produced the content. Consumers all get a piece of the pie after everything is said and done. More pie to those who bought the platinum subscription package. Sure, it was costly, could have bought a new Honda Civic instead, but when you get your "cable bill" in the mail, instead of "you owe us 89.99", you get "thank you for your attention, we've added 89.99 to your account balance." Works for e-books, music... everything. That's what we have here, most just don't realize it yet. Many don't even realize the entertainment industry generates billions yearly it seems. Shooting for basic facebook status messaging and photo sharing aspect is what some shoot for, thinking that's the future, but really those things are just designed to gather data. All smoke and mirrors used to push advertising into minds. Primitive and pointless. Sorry for the ramble.
Sounds about right, but sometimes it goes very, very wrong.
https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/3261079/google-executive-death-prostitute-heroin-yacht-california/
Yeah, I think that's the party I got invited to but couldn't go because I had "plans." Ha! How is that story even real...
That's comedic gold right there. That writer should be on Steemit.
Speaking of which... Isn't it fun how we're all back to talking in circles about some of the same things we've been talking in circles about since they invented the circle?
Do you really think someone invented the circle?
Posted using Partiko Android
Well, yeah, I mean, haven't you ever heard the legend? That guy went to work one day, started building squares on the production line, like any normal day before that. It was almost lunch break and he still had work to do, but was SUPER hungry, so he cut some corners to get the job done faster, and that square took on the shape of something like -----> O <----- one of those. The boss liked it and promoted him to lead shift supervisor, and you know what his name was? That's right!
Juan Circle
Damn
Fuck school, only told me shit
Thanks sir
Posted using Partiko Android
You're welcome.
^^
Posted using Partiko Android
It seems you came back at the right time :), when we need things explained in a simple, interesting way, and with a little bit of comedy.
I am skeptically optimistic.
Skeptically optimistic is a good way to be.