Announcing the Forthcoming Open Sourcing of UA, Free Accounts Give-Away, Unregistered UA Score & Rank Checking on steem-ua.com
Announcing the Forthcoming Open Sourcing of UA, Free Accounts Give-Away, Unregistered UA Score & Rank Checking on steem-ua.com
Aloha! We've been a little quiet the past weeks - well, in fact we didn't post anything since HF20 came out as @steem-ua - but we have in fact been pretty busy with a bunch of exciting new things!
In this post:
- Announcing the Forthcoming Open Sourcing of UA,
- Free Accounts Give-Away,
- Unregistered UA Score & Rank Checking on steem-ua.com
Let's dive right in!
Announcing the Forthcoming Open Sourcing of UA
As we said numerous times, we always intended UA to be Open Sourced and wide-spread throughout the Steem Blockchain. While some people have been impatiently shouting "Open! Open!", while others kept their cool and steadily supporting us in the mean time, we simply remained busy with development of both UA and some other projects we (@holger80 and @scipio) are working on. Of course due to HF20 we had to update Beem, and on top of that introduced Beempy with which it's possible to adequately get insights of the Steem Blockchain resource pool, the current and historical resource costs (RC) and which now also includes a ton of SteemMonsters data. ... We've been busy indeed! ;-)
And on top of that, we're also making sure that UA can be properly Open Sourced: as we don't take the Open Sourcing of UA lightly - we feel it's a very important algorithm and metric to everybody using the Steem Blockchain - we are adding more Unit Tests (to check if its components function as intended), a bit of modularized Code Refactoring, and - in order to let others use what we built - of course also some intra-code Documentation to accompany the repo.
As things seem to be progressing towards, we're aiming for the Open Source Repository Deployment of multiple UA components to happen around mid-to-end November, which we'll then - of course! - again announce properly in a dedicated @utopian-io post. Stay tuned!
PS: as we're not sure at this moment if there's a big interest for others to host a UA node of their own, at this moment we're also not sure what to do with UA-API ourselves. In case you're interested to host your own UA API, please connect with us on Discord, and if nobody is interested to run their own version, we'll probably continue with our own "official" version of UA-API as we are now. We're simply open to multiple scenarios and collaborations regarding UA-API.
Free Accounts Give-Away
HF20 has enabled high-RC accounts to claim discounted accounts. We tested that new opportunity out ourselves as well, yet as we're not intending to claim and use hundreds or even thousands of accounts ourselves, we decided to give away Free Accounts (!) to others!
The "rules" to get a free Steem accounts, are as follows:
- you must be, or know, somebody who doesn't have an account nor the crypto funds to purchase one "the old school way",
- and the "free Steemit.com" account creation you've tried already and it has taken you ages without success (still no account).
@steem-ua is all about "getting in & keeping in" as many Steem users as possible, because we believe the real value of the Steem Ecosystem is driven by real active users. Hence, the giving-away of Free Accounts to those who really need it!
Now, the problem of course is "knowing" if it's true you really are or know somebody in need of a new account and have no alternative way, due to the relatively anonymous nature of who's "behind" a Steem account. The best way to figure out (although we can never know for sure) if somebody is telling the truth or not, is to have direct contact with people. So, if you feel you really meet the criteria we've just mentioned, then talk to @scipio over at our Discord Server and if all is well, then we'll set you up with your account! Steem on! :-)
Unregistered UA Score & Rank Checking on steem-ua.com
Many have been "complaining" about only being able to see their own UA Score & Rank, and those in the daily Top 100 (of which a lot are Steem Top Witnesses and "Prominents"). And of course, for quite some weeks now, you were already able to view the UA Scores & Ranks of the current @steem-ua Delegators over at https://steem-ua.com/delegators. But still.... if you were interested to check the UA Score / Rank of a specific account, you could not.
But now you can! We've set up a bare bones UA Rank Checker, that doesn't require logging in via SC2 and/or limit you to only view your own account data. If you go to https://steem-ua.com:5000/accounts/scipio then you can see my account score... pretty exciting if you want to check mine and observe I've just entered the Top 200 (Whiiiiihooooo!)
Welcome scipio ! Your ua score is 6.333 and you have a ua rank of 199
... but of course you can replace "scipio" in the aforementioned URL with any account!
PS: it might be possible the server pings out and an error message is shown, at busy times. In that case, just come back at a later time and check again!
PS2: please don't auto-scrape that URI for multiple accounts and website overload. The more systems management we need to do, the longer it takes to be able to Open Source UA as announced at the top of this post...
That's all for now Folks!
UA, Steem User Authority: Use Your Influence!
Visit our steem-ua.com website - View your UA score
@steem-ua Algorithmic Curation & Upvote Program:
| SP Delegation | Sponsor Benefits & Upvote Frequency |
|---|---|
| 25 SP | max. 1 @steem-ua upvote per week |
| 50 SP | max. 2 @steem-ua upvotes per week |
| 100 SP | max. 4 @steem-ua upvotes per week |
| 250 SP | max. 7 @steem-ua upvotes per week |
| >= 5,000 SP | Stake-Based Sponsor Rewards + max. 7 @steem-ua upvotes per week |
PS1: delegation requirements could be subject to change, we'll then post about that prior to changes being applied.
PS2: @steem-ua reserves the right to reject upvoting accounts demonstrating abusive behavior.
Quick Delegation Links:
25 SP | 50 SP | 100 SP | 250 SP |
500 SP | 1,000 SP | 2,500 SP |
5,000 SP
Join our Discord:
@NoNamesLeftToUse
Rank: 344
I've been curious about this thing for weeks! It was eating me up inside! I lost sleep over this! I didn't feel like signing up! I just wanted to know if I was on this list! And if I was on this list, where?!
Rank 344
Woo!
PS, every account is "on the list"
edit: I'll upvote this message with $0.01 to not lose context of this answer to underneath the giant thread initiated by @phoneinf
Upvoted your comment so u get on top again ;-) Had to give my comment a boost since I got someone that wanted to hide it XD
Lol,
But let's be real you are one of the better Content writers in here. Should easily be in top 20. Content Creator rank would be something more accurate. Since they are the future of a content network. Who cares about an early adopter that got some quick Tokens. That is not a measure of Intelligence. A true algo would measure stuff as Integrity/Brave/Ability to Argue/Content Integrity/Ability to reply to Arguments. It would also look at what people are doing daily.
That is what is more interesting. I have written 300-400 word comments to some in this top 20 list. They just ignore. How the hell can they be ranked 4000 positions higher than me? In an ideal system their rank would drop massively if they ignore certain questions. The idea of a rank like this is that people can rest on old stuff from 2016. But the truth is that it's daily something that change. We all know the true rank. People that show up daily and produce new original content.
Real content creators has access to the true Gold and Leverage. Limitless content. 1 comment you write has many times more value than what another account does in 30 days. Human rank systems miss so many nuances. Some ppl can leverage stuff up to 1 million followers. Some people are Gods in content creation. Goethe... Mozart... Does anyone comes close? No... So it's interesting to see rank systems but I don't think it will ever be possible to make a real one that has all nuances involved
Yes. LoL is right. I came here to make a joke. Thank you for the kind words and compliments.
Why did you purchase a vote for this comment?
Like I said, I came here to be humorous and all that paid vote does is make me look like an arrogant asshole! People will think I purchased the goddamn thing.
I don't want this
fuckingdirty money and I'm forced to flag myself for disagreement with rewards.If this community wants to vote my posts and comments up organically, good, and for that I say thank you. These
fuckingpaid votes can lick my balls. I don't want them.You're talking about integrity. I did not buy my way up, I don't purchase votes. Whatever that 344 rank means, it was EARNED.
I think you misinterpret something in my original comment, it was a compliment to you that I thought you should have a higher rank in the system. 😉
Why would it make you look like an asshole? I really don't get that argument. If anyone wants to see why something got boosted they can dive into the source. If people think you purchased they can do an investigation. But I still don't get it since every person can boost something for whatever reason. It doesn't change the original message.
As far as I can tell this is a give and receive system. I think you should have more Stake as I think you will do good with it. If someone doesn't like that they can enable decline rewards. I did not know there was something called dirty money here. But since your aggressive reaction I think it has something deeper to do with money and not the reward given. Thought experiment: If you had your post on decline rewards and it got boosted to the top would it still be dirty money? Since it was done for visibility.
And I'm sure you know that I did not boost your post to piss you off, I boosted it since I thought it had value and that you should be ranked higher in visibility.
Let me start out by saying: You're now chipping away at whatever free time I had left today to produce content on my blog to corner me into a conversation we've already had about two days ago.
I will not be repeating myself.
This is not a thought experiment. I already explained to you how I'd feel about that.
Forgive me if these numbers are not precise:
The current cost to push my comment to the top is 18 cents. You placed nearly $4.00 beside my comment. You wasted around $3.80 of the reward pool to place my comment at the top. If something costs 20 cents, you spend 20 cents. If you're negotiating a price with someone, they're asking 20 cents, and you're willing to pay $3.80 instead of trying to get whatever it is for 19 cents, you shouldn't be anywhere near money. What makes it dirty is the fact someone took your $3.80 instead of looking at you like you must be some kind of moron and saying, "No! Dude! Are you crazy? $3.80 is too much! Were you born yesterday? How in the hell did you manage to live this long?" Only the shadiest of all shady used car dealers would take advantage of someone like that. If you wanted to purchase $1000 worth of cocaine, and you knew it was worth $1000 because that was the asking price, even the drug dealer would laugh at you if you offered him $5000. Yes, now I'm rambling on, but this is funny to me.
So, now I've covered again how you've wasted resources by pulling unnecessary funds from the reward pool, like I explained the other day when we had the EXACT same conversation.
So now you throw in the fact you'd like to see my stake grow. We all want that here, so for that, I can say thank you. BUT, I'd also like to see the VALUE of my stake grow. That's important. So, if you want to place nearly $4.00 next to my comments, I'd like to see you go out and purchase 80000 STEEM and power that up. I don't want to see people wasting the reward pool. A 4 dollar vote does not cost 4 dollars, it costs around $64000 and from there you can drop ten $4 dollar votes per day, everyday. You're trying to tell me your approach of placing 10 $4 dollar votes on posts or comments at the cost of $40 per day equaling $14600 per year is supposed to somehow increase the value of my stake?
So now I've explained how you're ripping yourself off. Now I've explained how you're wasting resources. And I've explained how you're ripping off the majority of stakeholders.
Do I need to keep talking? Look at how many people got ripped off already. Do you think I want to be the one to blame? I know some people can dig and find out the truth but many don't! They take you for what you are at face value. Is this your first day here? No! So wake up! It's not unusual to see the community frown upon members who self vote their comments at 100% weight to the top of the pile. When they use bots to add insult to injury, we often see flags. I don't want to be that guy, the frickin' douchebag getting flagged over some self-righteous bullshit.
Now can we PLEASE just go back to what this post is supposed to be about? I came here to make a funny, not a scene. Jeez you guys...
Who decides what "unnecessary funds" are? I don't buy that argument at all. Value of content is subjective and the blockchain itself is content agnostic.
The attempt to apply extraneous moralizations on an inherently neutral system has always mystified me.
So I take it you're confused?
He said the vote was purchased for a couple of reasons.
Visibility was one. At the time the top slot only cost about 20 cents. He overpaid. So that was pointless. A waste of money and resources.
He also said it was a tip. So, let's say he tipped me 3 dollars. He wasted his money using a middleman. He could have sent me that 3 dollars directly. Instead, a middle man also earns 3 dollars because that's what the vote cost PLUS the bot earns curation rewards, meaning I got shortchanged on my so called TIP.
Get it? See how wasteful it is?
Would you like me to explain further? Break it down for you piece by piece about how unnecessary it was?
Still mystified about how wasteful some folks have become around here?
That's true unless someone feels that bot services are beneficial to the STEEM economy, in which case it's more efficient to use one to boost a comment because then you can give to the bot owners/delegators and to you at the same time. From which perspective there is essentially zero waste (not including the "stealing from the rewards pool" argument, which, again, I find quite spurious) because you're being rewarded for the comment, and the bots/bot-owners/delegators for their service. It also increases your reputation number very slightly, as you know (and also know that it doesn't mean too much. Thus: @steem-ua.)
If, however, he's just wanting to give you a gift, it would be more efficient to send to you directly, I agree. Renting delegations to have greater influence on allocating the rewards pool is also a decent option, and much more accessible to those of us that don't have six figures sitting around to pump into buying SP.
I appreciate your response, we just view at things differently.
I look at Trust and Relationships as the main currency.
Putting $4 from the reward pool and giving it to one of the best content creators on Steem I don't see as a waste. For all I know you should have 10% of the daily reward pool. From my point of view I'm making an investment in a Stake holder with integrity. I believe in lavish splash of value as well
And I'm sorry if you didn't appreciate my boost. It was really meant as an act of love XD Won't happen again
Because of the awkward position it put me in, knowing the community in general frowns upon people purchasing their way to the top of comment sections, I'd like to suggest the next time you do that for someone, make it clear you purchased the vote. Clear their name. Don't make people dig for the truth, because they won't. Not many will vote after seeing bot votes on a comment. If this was an insanely popular post, you may have cost me potential profits. Feel free to be stuck inside your own head but I suggest you look around and at least acknowledge how some others feel about certain actions.
If I didn't notice, and if I wake up tomorrow, sign in and see my comment got flagged, I would have been more pissed off than you probably think I am now and those flags would have been your fault.
Do I look like a man of integrity if I'm ranked 344 and use bots on comments? Are you trying to sabotage my reputation while thinking a few dollars would be enough for me to let it slide? You put me in a position where I had to make it damn clear to everyone I had nothing to do with that shitty bot vote.
Think about what I told you the other day. The man who rents a nice car and suit so he can pretend to be a hotshot for the weekend vs the man who owns the nice car and suit with nothing to prove to anyone. The fake vs the real deal. I have nothing to prove. People who use bots with the hopes their opinion will sound more important or the hopes their work will look better; those people are fake as fuck and I don't care who disagrees with me and for what reason.
The interesting thing is I arrive at the same general choice of action from a completely different vector. I (almost always) won't use my borrowed VP or vote bots to push my comments to the top because
I generally don't feel convinced it is worthy of being placed so highly. If I did, I wouldn't hesitate to boost it. (I find the "power up enough STEEM to vote to that amount" argument quite spurious. There's a big difference between a small one-time payment and a huge 13-week long vesting commitment. Besides, when you pay a bot you are rewarding a large investor for vesting their STEEM in the first place, not "stealing from" the rewards pool.) How does the myth of organic value persist on STEEM? It has been mostly pay-to-win here ever since I've been here. The problem with expecting people (whales) to be philanthropic is that most humans are still operating at the level of basic survivalistic fear. The idea of a gift economy still makes no sense to most. We have to come to humanity's level to build a system that works for the present but extrapolates to the future.
/ end digressionThe promotional benefits of being at the top of a comment section are usually outweighed by the negatives of being too much in the spotlight.
The entire senseless, guilt-tripping, pitchfork-wielding masses who insist on hypermoralization of what is essentially just neutral algorithms.
I don't hold that same view. I think most are fine with upvotes. I think you take things way too serious. I don't think this place will thrive with dead seriousness about every single action happening. I don't agree with that view of being mega serious about every single thing.
You are trying to find a conspiracy in just a small loving action I tried to do. I love your work and personality but this is just too much. I love your Logic but using Logic to analyse a human with a heart and soul is the wrong tool. The Intellect is a cutting tool. If you use the Intellect on a Flower you will just have a bunch of pieces. Not a flower anymore.
I have people doing huge loving actions to me. I could go and try to analyze it all and probably find all kinds of stuff. But it's waste of time we are just humans trying to do our best. We need more love and understanding on this planet! We have Give and Receive on this planet. We need both! So we can build a better world together! 🌎❤️
that is weird someone would pay a bot to upvote someone else's comment randomly.
Yes give value to another human is very weird 👮
I guess I can see it... it's like a tip.
Yes!
This post has received a 9.96 % upvote from @boomerang.
I did not purchase this vote. Please remove the vote. I don't want your dirty money.
Hahaha! I read the discussion between the two of you on another post! ;-)
Here, have a real, completely un-promoted, upvote by me then! :P
This comment is supported by $2.65 @tipU upvote funded by @phoneinf :)
@tipU voting service guide | STEEM Monsters Lottery | Quick SBD <-> STEEM Exchange | For investors.
And again another small upvote to not lose context.
@nonameslefttouse : now I understand! It does feel embarrassing when your comment is promoted against your will!
Thanks. And I'm sorry for making a scene here. I was just joking.
No worries, I appreciate a good laugh every now and then!
I can see the future fight between some Humans hating on Robots already giving them value I try to work on Win-Win solutions with Bots and AI working together 😂
Wow! argument and playful like this do energize and also someone courage...you guys are good....
If I had hands I would give you thunderous applause.
Just stand in front of a fan and let the wind do the talking.
😂
This is the comment to be upvoting!
Looks like you saw the mess I made here. LOL!
I need to stay away from the trending page.
If you don't want upvotes, maybe a tip will do - tip!
Hi @nonameslefttouse! You have received 0.25 SBD tip from @cardboard!
Check out @cardboard blog here and follow if you like the content :)
@tipU voting service | For investors.
Great job, thanks for the update!
Are you guys gonna be attending Steemfest? I guess it'd be a great platform to further promote UA in the community, now that it's gonna be open source.
Great work guys :D
Well I hope you've got something in place to mitigate this as I suspect some will have a go :(
Is there another way to grab a snapshot of all the UA scores - DB Pull/readonly access? Cheers!
Thx! :-)
At the moment, no. "Snap shotting" isn't really interesting either, we think, since all UA scores / ranks change all the time. So after we've deployed the Open Source UA repo(s), we'll just see if anybody is interested to run their own UA node, and if not, we'll then decide how "big" we'll deploy UA-API ourselves.
I just delegated 25 SP. :)
Solid approach!
can i ask why steem-ua upvotes one picture posts please? I thought it was a quality curation program?
Posted using Partiko Android
@steem-ua is not a manual curation program and does not directly consider the content of the posts to be curated. Instead it considers multiple factors such as the UA scores of followers, upvoters, and (I believe) commenters to decide how much each user should be rewarded per post.
If the "one picture posts" are of insufficient quality, the idea is that people will, in theory, unfollow that user and stop upvoting and engaging. As a result, that user's overall UA score will drop and so will their reward.
Whether or not that works as planned is the subject of the experiment. :)
problem with considering the upvoters is that by using smartsteem bidbot, there care huge numbers of big names selling votes there so its bound to look like you are super popular with the dolphins! It its not considering quality of post, I dont see the point?
Posted using Partiko Android
There are a number of valid concerns about several aspects of @steem-ua and I think it's great that people care enough about Steem to raise them.
I see @steem-ua as a fun and well-intentioned experiment in attempting to reward organic behaviour, which is why I delegate. At this point, their intentions matter more to me than the actual results, and those intentions appear benevolent. Meanwhile, at the very worst, the current result is benign. I feel comfortable delegating knowing that I (and all other delegators) can always undelegate immediately if that changes.
Well said!
To share with you my take on the same topic: indeed @steem-ua is one use case / application (out of many!) of using UA data, and indeed the objectives of @steem-ua are "getting in & keeping in" users on the entire Steem Blockchain. To create a certain mechanism that incentivizes and rewards "good behavior" from a community perspective. If you shitpost, the value of that shitpost is still "something" but not as much as it could have been if you really gave it your best shot to produce top quality content. The algo identifies - pretty accurately as well - how others interacting with the post value that post.
For example, somebody in this comment thread wrote he/she is of the opinion that @berniesanders has a too high UA rank. I don't agree to that, because the entire Steem network is taken into account for him to have that UA score / rank. Does @berniesanders deserve an upvote, being a @steem-ua delegator, when "shitposting" (as he calls it himself) a picture of a toothbrush and a lamp, and/or create a contest / challenge for others to publish similar pictures?I'm of the opinion he does deserve our upvote indeed. You can agree or disagree or think whatever you like about his actions, but it is a fact he is influential on Steem, and that is what UA measures! Yes he is influential, and therefore yes he deserves a high UA_Account score.
Now, the interesting thing - as far as I'm concerned - is this: if @berniesanders decides to publish a masterpiece of content and spend a ton of time on writing it, then I am quite sure our algo is able to identify that that post of his deserves a higher upvote than his other posts. Intuitively, that justifies the algo functions as intended.
Also, suppose some random, unknown, rather new, not influential account delegating to @steem-ua would publish a similar example post with a challenge to post a picture of a toothbrush and a lamp: would that similar post deserve the same upvote? No! Because close to zero people know about that account, their post will not receive much attention.
And this brings me to an important distinction to make: @steem-ua is indeed an experiment to value "content quality", about any topic in any language, but not by the content alone, but also - or even mostly - by who (based on each post's author, voters and commenters) publishes and interacts with it (!!!).
A one photo post with (close to) zero additional textual content can have value, but who's to decide, and by which objective criteria, if that piece of content is "quality" content, and/or has "more or less quality" than a 500 word article? @steem-ua lets the giant network of follower relationships and the witness stake and their followings decide.
Is that perfect? No. Can we distinguish top quality content, always, 100% of the time? No. But it does work reasonably well.
Steem-UA disregards bidbots. The top x% at least
Posted using Partiko Android
so, how come it votes on one pic shit posts ?
Posted using Partiko Android
Great answer as many have been commenting on this lately with negative connotations. While I am sure it will be evaluated, it will be great to eventually see the correlations in the scores with metrics on quality and the such. Maybe something @abh12345 can look at with his Engagement League?
Wonderful news! I'm very happy to see you active. Actually... I'm so happy that I decided to increase my delegation from 50 SP to 100 SP! 😊
Great move, I was one of those shouting "Open! Open!" ^^
Looking forward to see the repo.
Are there any changes in the API?
As explained in my reply to @abh12345 and in the post itself, we're first properly preparing the UA Open Sourcing, and then see if / who's interested in running their own UA node. And then we'll take it from there.
Excellent! I will pass this on to interested people :)
That's always appreciated! :-)
Good news, congratulations to the UA team
Awesome move! Will take a look how to implement this to @steemnova to delist low-reputation players (multiaccs)
Oow! Please keep in mind the URI service is not intended to attach automated services to! Just a "quick lookup" service for occasional / individual account lookups done manually via the browser.
In order to automate / integrate live UA data, please wait at us deploying the repo(s), and we'll then see if / who's interested in running their own UA nodes. From that point on we'll know what to do with our own UA-API service, which you can then use for @steemnova and/or other use cases.
Okay, clearly understand!