After the dramatic events of March and the ensuing transition period, the social network Steemit entered a period of relative prosperity. The rapid growth rates of major cryptocurrencies have not bypassed STEEM: after more than 20-fold increase, it stabilized around two dollars for STEEM, leading to proportional increase of the pool of rewards from which payments are made to participants. However, the previous hardwork zeroed pool rewards, and his recovery took a little more than a month during which the payments were much less common, however, in early may the pool was restored. As of 17 June, the volume of the pool is more than $ 3 million; for comparison it may be recalled that at the time of maximum decline in the exchange rate on March 11, the volume of the pool was only 20 thousand dollars.
Grew in proportion and other factors: on 17 June the number of accounts in the network exceeded 200,000, although it is difficult to say what percentage of them are "live" users.
However, despite the seemingly bright prospects, the challenges of the economic model Steemit from the outset, remain unresolved. First and foremost is the extremely uneven distribution of wealth: 93% STEEM coins are in the hands of 1% of users, and that's not including the account @steemit (if you turn it on, it does exacerbate the situation). This means that whales (participants with more than 384 000 SP, or 800 Mvest) full control of the distribution of payments for posts: under the current rules, power upvote (or husky) is proportional to the square of SP at the expense of the voters.
Attempt to change position was made in the first version of hard forks No. 17: planned change quadratic voting system in quasi-linear, but the proposal was blocked by the majority of witnesses Steemit. As a replacement, whales temporarily abandoned a vote by the full power of your accounts for posts (the so-called "experiment"). Thus, hardwork No. 18, replacing the failed No. 17, was reduced to a few technical changes. In the absence of whales, monitoring of pool compensation has moved to the "guilds" – groups of users, consolidating their power in voting for certain positions. It is highly likely that a considerable part of the members of these guilds were newly registered accounts of whales, whom they have delegated part of their capital (the ability to delegate/loan SP was implemented in the hard forks 18).
Thus, the situation remains the same: as you can see, a large part of the compensation pool is distributed among a small number of the same authors, as the increase in payments to most regular members mainly due to the growth rate of STEEM, characteristic of most of cryptocurrencies in 2017 – a trend that may well change direction.
The first warning signal can be considered as a significant increase in Power Down (withdrawal of Steem STEEM Power in liquid for its subsequent sale). Diagram Power Down from @me-tarzan:
Hardwork No. 19 Equality
To change the situation through planned hard forks, received the name of "Equality" (Equality), which will be the 19th of March 2016, when the network Steemit started. The changes have already received approval of the majority of witnesses and most likely the fork will be implemented.
Activation new code will be held June 20 at 15: 00 UTC (18: 00 Moscow time). In addition to a number of technical improvements, here are three innovations that can significantly change the existing balance of power:
Linear scale of remuneration is quadratic. This means that the user c with a capital of 1000 Mvest will be a thousand times greater impact on the pool allocation than a user with 1 Mvest; the current ratio is a million to one (1000*1000/1). The voting formula used Mvest, not SP. The ratio of Mvest\SP dynamic, it can be viewed here.
Strengthening individual Apatow 4 times, while increasing 4 times the cost upvote. If now the user can make 40 appatow a day, and his powerful voice reduced to 83%, after the hard fork, he can only do 10 appatow a day. The rate of recovery of voting power does not change is 0.83% per hour. According to the developers, will benefit users with small capital (less than 1 Mvest), because they do not have the ability to change the power of the vote. Users with capital over 1 Mvest will be able to reduce the power of the vote to 25%, and for them nothing will change.
Whales will be able to vote the full capital.
Immediately after activating the fork, the balance of the unpaid remuneration of the users change (payment occurs at the expiration of 7 days from the date of publication). The authors for whom I voted only whales, the amount to be paid will fall, and those who voted "plankton" – will increase. However, most often, posts vote and those and others, so that changes are difficult to predict in advance. Add uncertainty and the averaging of payments under the new rules. In General, users should be prepared to ensure that immediately upon activating the fork, the size of their future payments will change. That's all we can say in advance.
It is assumed that innovation should make life difficult for professional curators (making the automated voting for the posts with the help of bots).
Critics point to the failure of change: according to @aggroed, the introduction of the linear scale with the simultaneous return of the vote of the whales will lead to the fact that instead of control 99% percent of the pool after fork whales will control 93%. However, there is little doubt that this is a step in the right direction. However, the proposal to continue the experiment to ban whale vote total power capital is not tenable. By agreeing to the experiment, whales, and so for two months voluntarily bear the losses. If they consider that their continued participation in the network profitable, they can begin a massive Power Down with the subsequent withdrawal of capital, leading to excess liquidity STEEM on the market, and depreciation.
Conclusion
In March, a year has passed since the start of Steemit. During this time the network failed to compete with the common social networks. It can be viewed as an ongoing social experiment in the emerging "attention economy". The hypothesis that the economy itself will push to the top quality content, dormancy is not confirmed. Rather, writing posts in Steemit while can be likened to mining based on PoW, where the vote of a whale or a Guild for any post similar to the found block.
New hardwork will hardly solve the basic problems of the network, but the determination of the developers to keep moving forward, even if in small steps, bringing optimism about the future of the project.
Source: https://bits.media/news/steemit-opyat-menyaet-pravila-khardfork-19-naznachen-na-20-iyunya/
18.06.2017
Material provided: Qandros
I Do Resteem I would be grateful ( @krasotka )