create account

The attention economy and aligning shareholder interests with user interests by dana-edwards

View this thread on steemit.com
· @dana-edwards · (edited)
$12.54
The attention economy and aligning shareholder interests with user interests
<html>
<h1><br>
<br>
Aligning our attention with our objectives in life is non-trivial. Social network platforms get it right in being sticky but because they are designed primarily for shareholder profits and often the shareholder interests are not aligned with the user interests this can result in problems.<br>
<br>
<br>
https://youtu.be/0jRNSEt-D9A<br>
<br>
Steemit does not currently achieve these goals of being an attention economy but it does at least seek to align the interests of the users with the token holders. This is because the users typically earn tokens and become token holders.<br>
<br>
That being said, Steemit is just as vulnerable to the game theoretic oligopolistic attacks that other proof of stake technologies suffer from. This is because Steemit started out as Steem proof of work which means a lot of the earliest Steem whales inherited influence from mining. In this case the interests of these whales might or might not be aligned with the interests of the users who had to earn their Steem Power.<br>
<br>
As we saw with Bitshares (centralized exchanges holding tokens), Bitcoin (mining pools potentially forming cartels), we also may see with Steemit. It is true that it would be best for Steemit if whales who inherited Steem Power from mining power down and cash out ASAP, it on the other hand hurts the users because the crash in price makes it no longer economically efficient to post.<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
 <br>
<br>
</h1>
</html>
👍  , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , and 26 others
properties (23)
post_id2,210,906
authordana-edwards
permlinkthe-attention-economy-and-aligning-shareholder-interest-with-user-interests
categorysteem
json_metadata"{"app": "steemit/0.1", "format": "html", "links": ["https://youtu.be/0jRNSEt-D9A"], "image": ["https://img.youtube.com/vi/0jRNSEt-D9A/0.jpg"], "tags": ["steem", "steemit", "blockchain", "crypto-news"]}"
created2017-03-21 18:02:42
last_update2017-03-21 18:03:48
depth0
children3
net_rshares8,711,108,695,264
last_payout2017-04-21 18:41:36
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value10.832 SBD
curator_payout_value1.708 SBD
pending_payout_value0.000 SBD
promoted0.000 SBD
body_length1,478
author_reputation305,883,151,147,557
root_title"The attention economy and aligning shareholder interests with user interests"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 SBD
percent_steem_dollars10,000
author_curate_reward""
vote details (90)
@cryptoctopus · (edited)
economics dictate the 80/20 principle will apply. Few at the top and plenty at the bottom.  Even if whale power down, other will come in through buy-in. 

Bitcoin has the same situation of centralized power through mining and economies of scale.

The only to limit the power of curation would be to cap the power of a whale vote and compensate through an interest rate for the remaining unused power. But there will always be inequality of outcome and power in steemit.
properties (22)
post_id2,211,195
authorcryptoctopus
permlinkre-dana-edwards-the-attention-economy-and-aligning-shareholder-interest-with-user-interests-20170321t182950923z
categorysteem
json_metadata"{"app": "steemit/0.1", "tags": ["steem"]}"
created2017-03-21 18:29:54
last_update2017-03-21 18:32:48
depth1
children0
net_rshares0
last_payout2017-04-21 18:41:36
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.000 SBD
curator_payout_value0.000 SBD
pending_payout_value0.000 SBD
promoted0.000 SBD
body_length469
author_reputation356,633,571,001,204
root_title"The attention economy and aligning shareholder interests with user interests"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 SBD
percent_steem_dollars10,000
@nanzo-scoop ·
>  it would be best for Steemit if whales who inherited Steem Power from mining power down and cash out ASAP

The problem with this is that if the existing whales 'cash out' they are likely to be selling to other whales. We'd have the same issue, just a different oligopoly.

Even if the whales divested their holdings to the existing users. Each user will have a price and a timescale in which they would sell... again, most likely to some kind of oligopoly.

Where there is 'value' (and most of us hope that STEEM does become valuable) as long a there is a free market, whales, cartels, institutional investors will always look to take a large chunk of it. Then there is always the danger that interests are misaligned.

The key for me, is that (with STEEM at least) there is the opportunity for users to get something in return for the value they give to the social network. They also play a hand in determining what is a valuable contribution to a social network and get (in some small part) to influence the distribution of rewards. 

This for me is exciting...  and I'm reconciled with the fact that if STEEM is successful, the top of the food chain is likely to be inhibited by the usual type of suspects in the first instance. Over time who knows how it would play out...
properties (22)
post_id2,211,201
authornanzo-scoop
permlinkre-dana-edwards-the-attention-economy-and-aligning-shareholder-interest-with-user-interests-20170321t183033033z
categorysteem
json_metadata"{"app": "steemit/0.1", "tags": ["steem"]}"
created2017-03-21 18:30:33
last_update2017-03-21 18:30:33
depth1
children0
net_rshares0
last_payout2017-04-21 18:41:36
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.000 SBD
curator_payout_value0.000 SBD
pending_payout_value0.000 SBD
promoted0.000 SBD
body_length1,279
author_reputation284,009,804,791,421
root_title"The attention economy and aligning shareholder interests with user interests"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 SBD
percent_steem_dollars10,000
@trafalgar ·
$0.12
I agree that there definitely needs to be some changes and I've only been on here for a couple of days

Voting power should at most be linearly correlated with steam power, rather than the ^2 relationship we have right now

Additionally, exposure should be more strongly correlated with the number of actual votes than the amount of $ rewarded, perhaps a logarithmic or root 2 relationship with steem power

At the moment they're reluctant to reduce the utility of steem power in an effort to keep steem prices up. I believe this is a fool's errand. In a highly liquid market the underlying value of the asset in question can be easily determined by a relatively small fraction of trades happening at the margin. Getting people to lock up their investments in steem power, masternodes etc won't do much good to stop your prices dropping
👍  
properties (23)
post_id2,234,970
authortrafalgar
permlinkre-dana-edwards-the-attention-economy-and-aligning-shareholder-interest-with-user-interests-20170324t075642063z
categorysteem
json_metadata"{"app": "steemit/0.1", "tags": ["steem"]}"
created2017-03-24 07:57:03
last_update2017-03-24 07:57:03
depth1
children0
net_rshares815,367,941,912
last_payout2017-04-21 18:41:36
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.120 SBD
curator_payout_value0.000 SBD
pending_payout_value0.000 SBD
promoted0.000 SBD
body_length836
author_reputation193,493,627,539,094
root_title"The attention economy and aligning shareholder interests with user interests"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 SBD
percent_steem_dollars10,000
author_curate_reward""
vote details (1)