I like steemit so far, and yes there is a war waged on the dissemination of certain ideas on other platforms, but the fact that money itself can essentially buy limited slots on the trending and hot columns of steemit means that whichever poster has the most voting power via their stack gets the views. This is a centralization of what information is displayed for the longest amount of time on a platform that was supposedly about decentralization, and because of the deflationary nature of the coin and the fact that self-voting, circular voting, and vote buying are not prevented or punished I don't see how it will change for now.

As the platform matures and the audience grows it's probable that we will indeed see a rise in viewership and use by those who finally get sick of the blatant status quo leaning corporations who operate the other social media sites, but it's not outside the realm of imagination to guess that if we become a serious problem they will start throwing money and technology to sway opinions here yet again.

And the risk always remains that those who are vocal about their opinions and are seen as a threat to the system have willingly given up their anonymity by using the faucet for a free account when using a phone number, and even if they didn't it will still be rather trivial for AI to figure out the flow of money required to buy some starter steemit, as it's already done for people who have tried to obfuscate purchases with Bitcoin.

In fact a public blockchain is probably a state's wet dream when it comes to knowing exactly what everyone's opinions are, as an immutable ledger of who dislikes what and why is what they were developing privately anyway. Blog safely out there, rainy roads are no joke.