LOL: Voice isn't going to be on EOS?
Back in the day I was really worried about EOS bringing competition to Steem. After a while I realized the differences between the two chains were likely enough to separate them into their own corners that wouldn't compete. Even in the case that I was wrong, Steem has the first-to-market advantage over EOS by two years, which is not to be underestimated.
Just like Bitcoin will not be overtaken by a project that is slightly better, so will Steem not be overtaken in the same way.
The only thing that can kill Steem is Steem.
The only thing that can kill Bitcoin is Bitcoin.
The only thing that can kill central banks is central banks.
These services can't be killed by projects that are slightly better. They can only be killed in the event of their own catastrophic failure. Central banking is well on its way to taking a dirt nap over the next few decades. Likely to be replaced by more agile corporations and hopefully crypto DAOs.
https://www.coindesk.com/block-one-will-not-launch-its-social-network-on-eos
In any case, enter this bit of news, and I just have to laugh. EOS' social media platform isn't even going to be on EOS? LOL WTF!?
With this announcement came additional details, such as a frequently asked questions page on the Voice website that revealed the new application would run on a private deployment of EOSIO software.
"While Voice is in beta and a highly iterative state, it will be run on a purpose-made EOSIO blockchain. In time, we would like Voice to leverage the EOS Public Blockchain, and potentially others that can meet the performance and governance demands of Voice."
Possible explanations:
EOS has had performance issues that have become acute since last summer.
What the article doesn't consider is the more likely reason for booting up yet another network.
performance and
governancedemands
Meaning more centralization and more control. A product that Block.One has direct control of no matter what. You know, when I first became super interested in crypto I thought Dan was great. What a great guy doing great things; living in abundance and sharing the wealth with everyone. Now it's more like watching propaganda for the US military. "A global force for good." KEK!
Voice will run on its own separate blockchain for the same reason that every account on Steem can vote for 30 different witnesses using the same stake: complete dominance of the network by a centralized authority. This is a bit of a tangent, but isn't it obvious that the same coin shouldn't be able to vote in multiple witnesses? (Let alone 30 when only the top 20 get paid regularly.)
In any case, Dan seems to be the master of sacrificing decentralization and security for scaling. Luckily for us, Steem might have hit the jackpot in this department. We're just decentralized enough to remain relevant as this movement pushes forward.
When we look at the pros and cons of Steem, are we looking for more scaling and higher throughput? Obviously not. We aren't even close to utilizing this blockchain to its full potential as it stands now. Sure, MIRA was nice. Getting off the RAM standard and onto SSDs was a great leap, but for the most part we just need better coin distribution and more viable applications running on the network. EOS needs the same thing, and Dan is running off to a separate project once again and leaving them to fend for themselves.
When you consider how much money the EOS ICO generated these actions are completely unacceptable. They could really be doing great things with all that money to the benefit of the entire world. Instead everything they do seems to be more of the same corporate cash grabs.
I'm sorry to say that Voice is doomed to fail, and I don't make that claim in an attempt to shill up Steem. The two projects don't compete in the least bit. Voice hangs on the crux of KYC, which is completely opposed to decentralization. Block.One is essentially producing a pegged product much like a stable coin, but instead of pegging a token to a fiat currency they are pegging accounts to government issued identity. That is a centralized attack vector that will be exploited given a high enough profitability.
The only way to merge KYC and crypto is to develop a decentralized KYC that has nothing to do with the legacy system. I've spoken to this idea many times in the form of a reputation system. Same thing. Again, it's not a competitive idea. The first network to build such a system will be cloned by many other blockchains.
Conclusion
All the leadership in this space seems to be dominated by greedy money-grubbing assholes. Their actions speak louder than their words, and their actions tend to be the metaphorical comparison of snorting coke off a hookers ass. If only these happenstances were that entertaining.
Luckily the low overhead and unregulatable nature of crypto will allow more honorable leaders to take the helm as this space develops over the next decade.
Classic call. Pretty hard to disagree.
Voice can run off its own EOS clone (with tweaks) and still be in the EOS wheelhouse. It's a bit sucky for original EOS investors to be spawning clones everywhere unless they are doing some kind of airdrop to EOS holders - but I doubt it. That's another issue I guess.
The KYC thing is pretty sucky. I have deliberately not attached my real world identity to my STEEM account, but you could still argue that if Voice is competing with Facebook then is it a lesser evil?
The problem with lesser evils IMHO is that greater and lesser reveals a slope, which inevitably results in increasing evil over time due to slippage, and absolute evil eventuating. When I am faced with a choice between greater and lesser evils, I do everything in my power to opt out.
It is not always possible to choose an option that isn't evil, sadly, and I think this is why I'm gonna die sooner or later.
Very true. Though if Voice takes down Facebook I'll still be cheering. Then we'll just need something better to take down Voice.
Hopefully STEEM can get it's act together and be a competitive force for good in this space but so far I'm not really seeing it.
I'm so happy to read about it. EOS is pure centralized since the very beginning.
There’s a name for something like that: we name it FUF, Fucked Up Front! !trdo
Congratulations @pele23, you successfuly trended the post shared by @edicted!
@edicted will receive 0.09637988 TRDO & @pele23 will get 0.06425325 TRDO curation in 3 Days from Post Created Date!
"Call TRDO, Your Comment Worth Something!"
To view or trade TRDO go to steem-engine.com
Join TRDO Discord Channel or Join TRDO Web Site
Their rate of innovation seems to be leaps and bounds ahead of their faith in that same innovation.
i agree with your speculations.
EOS was supposed to be this great, scalable, super-highway for all things block chain.. so why is a separate EOS clone needed for the new social-media platform?
That just smells of in-fighting and/or control issues.
But, i was turned off of EOS almost two years ago when i heard people were banned. (yes, its not the whole story) And when you have a distributed system that can ban people... well, its no longer distributed nor open.
On a separate note, the really killer, decentralized social media platform will be everyone having their own "wall" server. You control who gets to see what. You get to choose what to post and host. And you get to decide who are your friends.
I am sure a linux distro could be turned into such quite quickly, the harder part is the interface.
I imagine we will have wall browsers in the near future.
that is so ridiculous
I’m still going to use voice tho... they paid 30 million for the domain name 😂😅😅
Posted using Partiko iOS
Did they really? That's like more than Steem's market cap... haha.
it's more than half of Steem's market cap
Yeah but at the same time if you actually pumped that much money into Steem it would go 10x. It's hard to compare market cap with actual liquidity and cold hard cash.
Voice only stores a hash of the identification information (government issued ID + biometrics). While a hash function meant to be a one-way encryption function, there is no guarantee how fast the price of computing power will drop in the future for the ID hashes on Voice to stay irreversible. Imagine large quantum computers becoming reality and cheap enough in the next couple of decades.
I'm not really worried about how the information is stored (security), but rather how easy it will be to falsify fake identities. If we look at the tenants and ideology of decentralization it's an obvious step in the wrong direction imo.
Would you clarify that idea a bit, please? How are fake identities in contradiction with the tenets and ideology of decentralization or how does that advance something that contradicts the tenets and ideology of decentralization?
I think KYC itself is against the spirit of decentralization. I don't think monetizing personhood is a good idea, and the entire concept of one-person one-vote is flawed to the core. The establishment has already perfected the exploits of one-person one-vote in the form of democratic republics. Anyone with financial resources can simply pay to change the perceptions of a percentage of the masses to align with the agenda presented. Voice is trying to implement a broken system that's already been cracked. Mob rule isn't a good form of governance.
Isn't the way that KYC is contrary to decentralization simply that it enables centralized institutional control? In other words, were there no centralized institution that could use KYC to oppress individuals, then verifiable identity wouldn't be a vector for crimes against humanity. I note my visceral and innate agreement with your statement that monetizing personhood is a bad idea, which is why I ask for greater clarity.
Also, while 1a1v is susceptible to voters being bamboozled, that isn't a problem of voting per se, but rather the power differential between institutions and individuals. Denigrating 1a1v because institutions currently abuse individuals is equivalent to denigrating individuals themselves because of that power differential.
I don't disagree that it's a problem, nor that democracy is presently utterly corrupted by that problem. I disagree that individual sovereignty is the problem. This is why I believe that decentralization increasing the power of individuals is the necessary factor on which the prosperity of our posterity depends.
It is my hope that technological advance will eventually enable these specific challenges to be overcome, and doing so will depend on accurately characterizing them in order to effect that advance. Successfully enabling individuals to understand facts and correctly assess falsehoods is a substantial part of solving the specific problem you note voting suffers, for example.
Aaron Eckhart (Two-Face): You either die a hero or you live long enough to see yourself become the villain.
Thank God we got rid of Dan, because of that Steem is more decentralized