You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
RE: This is called the HIVE AirDrop Exclusion List. (HIVE 에어드랍 제외 대상 목록이라고 합니다.)
Anyone who contributed to have 90% of the chain controlled by one server controlled by one entity for months is not welcome on this new chain.
Yup... totally agree, but someday, we gotta be open to the idea that Hive will hardfork into another chain, say
LIBERTY (FromAssholesWhalesStakeHolder)... and then folks will mass powerdown Hive and sell it to oblivion after the hardfork like what's going to happen to Steem. The precedent has been set. I look forward to doubling my HIVE when that happens.
This one raises one of the major concerns I was thinking when the Hive split off; they claimed that they were going to maintain the 'account' on the new servers.
Let's think about that for a moment.
You have an account at bank A, the managers at the bank have an argument with the CEO, so, they decide that they will create bank B across the street and will maintain the accounts and the values of them.
You as a user have an account at bank A and a duplicate at bank B; you can then sell off your accounts and double the funds.
Simply, if cryptos were treated as a type of security, there would be a group of people who would be going to jail for 10-20 years a piece for pulling this kind of stunt.
We should each (ESPECIALLY people who invested real money into the platform) be asking ourselves how we can maintain trust in a system that can be torn apart and redistributed because of those within the community with the most influence?
I couldnt have said it better my self. Well spoken 👏
wow. so. I have to say. your example doesn't work with physical money. doubling a list doesn't double funds... but if you use monopoly in the example, it would be perfect
investing is not zero risk. a sucessful investor has to stay updated
@therealmadnessj @bmanmcfly
Well, yes, copying physical money is illegal, but when you get into reserve banking, only about 10% of the money is physically printed, so, the effect would be the same, so, copying the account and promising to honor the value creates the same effect (never would happen in the real world).
But it does double the funds; or at least the coins at the rate they can be traded at.
Ex; when the split happens, you have a 10k account valued at 5k. That means you doubled the coins, and if the value remained (it shouldn't) you will have doubled the value.
I realize it's far from a perfect analog, but for real, if cryptocurrencies were treated as securities, Sun and all the witnesses would EACH be facing 10-20 years in pound you in the ass federal prison. Make no mistake about it.
Your counter goes to show that crypto currencies are effectively a ponzi scheme in that the value of the 'investment' depends on new investment dollars coming in.
ps: 10% of a lot of money is still a lot of money. actual physical money is not an idea, it is simply fiat money. utility tokens have nothing to do with it. utility tokens are basically companies pushing out a product, not actual fiat money
what I meant is the 2nd bank owner would have to put actual money into it to make it work. which would be stupid since he would have to provide enough money for all of his client's withdrawals. otherwise I would see my bank account having $5000, try but fail to withdraw. because the actual money is not there. it is completely different because the money has to be there
what. no. what do you think steem originally is, by design? the blockchain itself perfectly serves it's purpose. people who like consuming content get on it and optionally support authors they like. people who like creating content post their stuff here because it might pay off. it works. it is perfect.
people don't understand steem because they don't want to. all they want to see is a pile of numbers. there is a lot more to it than numbers. bitcoin is all numbers. that could be considered a ponzi scheme. anything that is nothing but numbers may fall into that category. not steem
but I guess it is a pointless argument since not a single fucking witness ever wanted to actually work on mass adoption, which is, free instant registrations. from this perspective, they're all retarded
You cant, but same thing will happened if the company you invested for files for bankruptcy.
theyre both already super cheap but will all end up like golos, so will eops. All @dan larimer chains are scams now
Only telos is the right chain with real governance. Steem and EOS are still useful. hive is more centralized than steem because you saw how fast they moved like a vertically integrated centralized organism lol.
Vitalik and Tone Vays were right
https://www.fxstreet.com/cryptocurrencies/news/vitalik-buterin-calls-eos-tron-and-neo-centralized-piece-of-trash-201902080151
That's the issue with DPOS though, you can buy enough stake to control the chain.
You are still controlled by a ninja mined stake, all witnesses will be decided by @freedom
That's a good point, I'm equally disgusted by the ninja-mined stake there. btrade and freedom, at least btrade is participating and trying to add value, Freedom, not so much.
@transisto
I'm very curious to know if you are currently in charge of all the decisions regarding the Hive fork and if this was your decision or if others were involved?
Edit: I'm referring to the exclusion of investors who voted for the sock puppet witnesses.
Nothing like using a centralized solution to thwart an attempt at centralization, eh?