You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
RE: Blockchain Update 3: Hardfork 20 and Release 19.4 – AppBase, StatsD, and RocksDB
The issue for that (along with quite a few others not mentioned in the post) is still listed in the HF20 project: https://github.com/steemit/steem/issues/1878
Looking forward to this. These forks are one reason why Steem outperforms all other decentralized networks on the planet. In my humble opinion.
Not judging by user retention it doesn't:
Snapchat has a retention rate of ~30%.
Instagram has a retention rate of ~39%
Facebook has a retention rate of ~69%
Steemit's retention rate is an embarrassing 13%.
My suggestion, which will be roundly ignored I'm sure, is to boot every single bot off this place - make "institutional" tools that handle spam and duping external content, and decouple the relationship between vote power and how many tokens one holds.
Otherwise, you just have a microcosm of the "outside world" where the deepest pockets win, and the little guy/gal just goes away.
But I'm sure they'll keep shuffling the deck chairs until there are no more users to care.
The platform is still young. Changes are being worked on to improve a lot of the issues that people have. Also, your comment is technically not relevant to @gray00's. He/she said "decentralized networks on the planet". None of the websites you cited are decentralized. Are there any blockchain social media sites that are beating Steem?
If Steemit can't keep people around, then what is the point?
A "perfect" system populated by bots?
The bots have been here since the beginning of the platform. Sites like Reddit have a lot of activity from bots too. Finding a way for bots and humans to co-exist should be part of the thought process, because it will never be possible to eliminate bots. They can also provide a lot of value too, depending on their programmed purpose.
Which is precisely why I said there should be basic functions provided by Steemit platform-enabled services.
The rest tend to be the kind designed to "game" the reward pool, and it isn't helping.
The dismal retention rate is proof of that.
I’m open to discussing ideas. Do you have any suggestions for changes?
My suggestions have already been summarized with my opening argument.
Either Steemit fixes its abysmal retention, or market forces will ensure the platform grinds to a halt.
Snapchat, Instagram, Facebook isnt decentralized.
Comparing Steemit to current mainstream social media platform is as unfair as comparing a horse to the first gasoline powered prototype automobile in the 1800s.. The horse wins, sure, early 1800s cars are shit. But no one is using horses on the AutoBahn today.
I have a feeling you don't understand what the Steem blockchain stands for and what it actually aims to achieve, It's more than just "content platform that pays users". "Institutionalization" is exactly what the steem blockchain is fighting against. "decoupling the relationship between vote power and how many tokens one holds" goes against stake-weighted voting that is the whole point of the steem blockchain.
Perhaps when SMTs come out people can issue SMT that works on 1A1V/ABV as there is use for such methods of voting. But the base layer steem reward distribution has to be stake-weighted to work. A spam account's vote cannot worth the same as an account of a person who worked and invested on the platform for years.
I disagree. Rewarding creators and curators is a completely separate issue from basing rewards on stake, and Steem, from my read of the white paper, was not intended to duplicate the issues stake weighting imposed on societies throughout history, but to revolutionize how economic rewards impacted society, using Steemit as a microcosm.
Indeed, as @ned has repeatedly pointed out recently, this is precisely one of the purposes of SMTs, as combining them with oracles and communities enables stake weighting to be avoided as it was not for Steem itself.
I expect that the user retention rate is a reflection of how unsatisfactory many have found stake weighting on Steemit. For the cohort of which I am a member, joining in May 2017, the retention rate is about half the 13% figure named, actually about 7.5% YOY.
I expect that communities that emphasize stake weighting will have even lower retention rates when alternatives become available, as they have not yet on Steemit.
The real point of censorship resistance is to empower society to reflect actual facts in their posts and comments, and pandering to stake is inherently degrading. The preferability of alternatives will be quickly revealed, and communities will thrive or fail as a result of their recognition of the vastly higher value of honest and factual creations to society than those merely better funded.
While the several social media platforms earlier mentioned weren't decentralized, few users of social media have much idea what effect decentralization has yet. The abysmal retention rate of Steemit in comparison reflects the satisfaction of users based on the metrics they find compelling, and the absence of stake weighting is possibly a significant factor, despite the utter lack of earnings on other platforms most users are availed that are potential on Steemit.
The 7.5% retention rate was calculated by @paulag, and you can verify the validity by checking out her blog, which I highly recommend.
You gave me alot to think about. Perhaps the emphasis on stake-weighted voting needs changing. I dont know for sure what is the best way to go about it.
But I can think of one problem if stakes on the blockchain are removed, specifically what then would incentivize users to gather steem and hold them as a Store of Value? You can surely agree that if there were no incentive to hold on to steem, every creators would drive views and clicks (possibly using click-farms) to their posts, get payout and immediately cashout.
As for user retention, tbh by now i can't quite care less (or perhaps i've changed my stance on "user retention/acquisition") because more than likely those who came here for quick profit alone came here for the wrong reasons and they will be the ones that leave here. You can call it maximalism, elitism whatever. But tbh i dont think we're ready for full mass adoption yet.
I don't think the steem blockchain will be the only blockchain that is relevant to the content web. Maybe another competitor will soon rise and rival against Steem's stake-based voting? Only the market will tell. Until then I'm sticking to the platform that gave me an opportunity that i otherwise would never have gotten anywere else.
I know in the crypto-verse every centralized service is the nail to every blockchain solution hammer -- but that isn't the point.
Those services know how to keep people around.
If Steemit can't get their act together, then what is the point?
Bot-topia, with automated crapposts and upvotes?
'bot-topia' love it love it love it.
The stats are not good, but there are many people on the ground trying to improve these numbers. The problem is, steemit inc is only supporting devs with smt possibilities and not people trying to help the folk here on Steemit. By doing this to me they are saying the do not believe in steemit.com. Steemit.com as it is now, if not taken care off will not be the front for the steem blockchain for long, Dlive and other apps will be
I sure hope that Steemit cease becoming the front page of the Steem blockchain too though.
I rather the devs behind Steemit.inc focus on more meaningful things and leave the front end to 3rd party companies. Busy or the dozens other platforms.
IMO the only reason people still use steemit is the 0% beneficiary fee and the habit of using this website. I'm sure that will change soon.
What do you suggest?
What is retention rate of Dlive ? Still a bit early to tell. What is the retention rate of YouTube Adsense creators? I think you have a valid complaint. But then again. How many accounts were scam accounts and what not? How did you get to 13% is what i'm asking? Not saying it's wrong just curious.
@paulag did a analysis - not only of the retention rate, but the theoretical userbase that is actually contributing to Steemit -- and it sure isn't 1 million accounts, more like 45,000 if we're lucky.
Doesn't bode well, is all I'm saying.