Quote from: smooth on July 16, 2016, 07:18:57 AM

Quote from: iamnotback on July 16, 2016, 05:20:39 AM

smooth, why don't your double your investment in SP from $5 million to $10 million and show us that you really believe in the long-term plan? Btw, what is the long-term plan Huh

Who ever invested in a company for the long-term and there isn't even a prospectus. Roll Eyes

1. It would be silly for me to increase my investment, even if I think it is a great investment. I stated earlier that $5 million wouldn't dramatically change my life but it isn't pocket change for me either. For diversification reason alone it makes no sense for me to further concentrate. A better argument would be to look at people with smaller stakes in Steem and see if they invest more. As I see it, many have, but you pointed out earlier that it could be fake. I can't conclusively refute that, so I won't try.

But if you could withdraw the $5 million now from Steem Power, I am nearly certain you would convert most of it to STEEM (so you'd be ready to cash out as the price reaches its apex)? Also you obtained your tokens nearly at no cost since you were mining during the "stealth mine" phase where I presume hashrate difficulty was extremely low, thus you can justify very high risk because you already earned back your investment of effort orders-of-magnitude times. i.e. I guess/presume you have on the order of 1000X gains already on the portion you've been allowed to cash out.

I'm leaning to the guess that those converting STEEM to Steem Power (to lock themselves in for 2 years) are deluded fools (with a lot of production[1] to fool them with). And it could be the automatic conversions due to 5 SP awarded to (as reported) 3000 new signups per day, but I am not sure also because I haven't even looked at the block chain. I have a limited amount of time to waste on researching a project I think is retarded. The extent of my research on Steem is more or less the white paper and discussions in this thread.

That I didn't expect anyone rational to convert STEEM to SP, is again the side-effect of my inability to perceive how dumb other people are. I have in my life always been too unfocused on how foolish other people are. I realize this is a skill I need to hone, but it is so depressing I don't like to think about it. It tends to make me very sarcastic when I do. (Could I be entirely wrong about Steem? I'd place those odds at best 1-in-a-100 given everything I have explained in this thread and on Dan's past history which I've followed since 2013. Not so surprisingly, Dan has a following of groupies who think he is well accomplished[1].)

No slander is intended towards CoinHoarder and others who support Dan. I think they need more experience. This will be gained over time.

Quote from: smooth on July 16, 2016, 07:18:57 AM

2. Buying Steem/SP is not investing in a company, it is investing in a blockchain token (rhetoric about DACs/DAOs aside). Such a decision needs to be made based on an assessment of the prospects for the value of that token, which may be related to the prospects of the Steemit corporation, but are not identical. Your assessment is obviously negative. Mine is more neutral to mildly positive but not so positive I would double my already significant investment, and I also would hardly be surprised if it failed completely.

It seems to me that given the corporation controls the block chain, then you are investing in the corporation and Ned Scott, not in a decentralized, permissionless, trustless block chain that could be used for other purposes and ecosystem than those planned by "Dan and Ned" (when they aren't busy doing anal).

Quote from: iamnotback on July 16, 2016, 12:23:38 PM

Example of why PoS block chains can't be trusted to not violate the protocol and bailout themselves (leading to corruption and fighting over who controls the resource):

Quote from: iamnotback on July 16, 2016, 11:43:08 AM

Quote from: spartak_t on July 15, 2016, 08:48:15 AM

In the security announcement CEO of Steemit Ned Scott said:

User accounts and wallets are not at risk, and we hope to soon reactivate the Steemit website to normal order. Any users whose accounts were compromised will be completely reimbursed.

Then just like Ethereum, Steem is not a trustless, permissionless, decentralized block chain. But this is expected, because all PoS block chains must be centralized with checkpoints and thus are under top-down control.

Steem is a corporate controlled block chain, which is the antithesis of why we created block chains to remove us from the certain failure of democracy and governance. We need block chains to be immutable and changable by no one after they are launched. I'll be trying to demonstrate a new design for a block chain which has this immutable property (even more so than Satoshi's original design).

Your neutral assessment makes no sense to me given your past intense defenses of proof-of-work, until we consider that you have $5 million at-risk that you can't cash out immediately and the price must remain high for 104 weeks so you can cash out. I think if you look in the mirror, you will realize your normal objectivity of course has been corrupted by that 2 year lock in.

Have you read the past few pages of this thread wherein I have explained my analysis as to why I think the Steemit plans are economically, marketing, psychologically, and technologically retarded?

[1]

Dan's development group does have considerable coding production. And they have produced functional block chains, functional market driven asset pegs, apparently a functional decentralized exchange, and a DPoS innovation that has some better performance characteristics as compared to Peercoin's PoS. Frankly if they had my design skills matched with their coding production, in an ideal synergy great things could be accomplished. But unfortunately when I tried to discuss with Dan in these forums in 2013, I realized he was incorrigible. Even Charles found that out the hard way. The Mythical Man Month makes is difficult enough to get coding done when the developers are philosophically in sync, but if the developers are disagreeing over fundamental concepts such a PoS versus PoW, then working together would be a clusterfuck of arguments. This is why I haven't bothered to pursue working with them.They are headstrong young guys who want to try their own experiments. They have more raw coding resources at their disposal right now than I do. I am also stubborn about the principles of design that I think I know are valid. So it would pointless for me to work with them. I thought about it last year, then I realized "Just no".

But coding production does not equal success. Just go ask all the startups that have failed. Most startups fail, because getting all those decisions economically, marketing, psychologically, and technologically correct is difficult and requires expertise and experience.