RE: Remember when @Blocktrades explained how a fork is not theft and you ate that shit up like it was candy?
You are viewing a single comment's thread:
You're leaving out the idea of a Contentious Hard Fork(Chain split/Hive) vs a Non-Contentious Hard Fork(an upgrade).
Hive was not an airdrop; Hive was not free money; Hive was not a "new asset".
HIVE IS THE ORIGINAL CHAIN WITH THE ORIGINAL COMMUNITY.
Hive is obviously and clearly a new asset. It has to start over getting listed on exchanges. It has a different value, even different rules. I have different balances on Steem and Hive, this is obviously, objectively not true.
0
0
0.000
There was nothing new about Hive. It was clearly a Fork of steem, containing all the information from steem. So the term 'airdrop' wasn't really an airdrop. People just got the same coins they had on the previous chain. Only this time, some accounts were restricted, and that was contentious.
The Steem community also performed a fork, and this time, they did the same thing. Zeroed the accounts of a select group of individuals and moved it to different account. You could say they probably should have changed their name from Steem to something else, say 'Hiver' so it might look different. But you can clearly see the similarity here. A contentious fork too.
To me, both sides have done the same thing to each other. There's nothing more we can do about it.
No. That is objectively wrong. I find it pretty astounding there are actually this many people not understanding this simple concept so let me make it even more simple for anyone else confused.
Ever saved a file on your computer? You know there is a difference between "Save" and "Save As..."
Hive = "Save As..." with some changes, the different balances are not the only change on Hive. There is also a change to how witness voting works. You had one file, now you have 2 files. A NEW FILE. Get it?
Steem's recent HF = "Save" ie no new file, or a non-contentious HF, or an upgrade. Still ONE FILE.
In the first example of Hive, the original file remains, unchanged. So if you had assets there you still have them. You aren't entitled to anything in the NEW FILE.
In Steem's HF, people had assets and they were STOLEN, there is no NEW FILE, the only file was edited. Something people had, they no longer have.
This is seriously not that difficult to understand people, wtf.
"SAVE AS": HF21
"SAVE AS": HF22
"SAVE AS": HF23 (HIVE)
"SAVE AS": HF23 (STEEM)
See what I did there?
No I don't. What's the point you're trying to make?
You are thinking about this from a legacy economy point of view.
You, like many others, believe Steem is an old asset because the CENTRALIZED EXCHANGES say so and be cause the CORPORATE BRANDING say so. We have all been brainwashed by how things have operated our whole lives. Crypto is different. This is an open-source cooperative economy that NO ONE truly understands, just like the legacy economy at large. There are too many unpredictable variables and emergent dynamics.
No, you didn't, unless you were on that shitlist and got your coins sent to @steem.dao. Are you measuring balance in terms of USD? Another laughable situation, and also something that I've been bringing up lately. 26M Steem does not equal $5M. Ned knew this; everyone knows this.
No, I'm not. I'm thinking of this in a literal, technical, objective point of view.
What is a blockchain?
It's just a database. It's entries of information. It's a ledger, ie the information is only added.
When Hive forked, a NEW database was created and maintained that contained NEW information that exists completely separate and apart from the Steem database. "Save Ae..." = New File = New Database.
Don't take the fact that you don't understand how this works and assume NO ONE understands it. That's a ridiculous thing to say. Obviously people are designing blockchains as we speak so people clearly understand it.
Obviously I mean POST fork, which is the proof that there is a new and separate database/asset/blockchain/information.
Seriously don't really get how this is confusing.
Like I keep stating over and over and over again:
You'll see how wrong you are in ten years.
Even Vitalik, who isn't even interested in DPOS, can see this.
When a contentious split happens in DPOS stake from both opposing sides must be nullified.
That is a fact.
Over the next ten years you are going to see this happen again and again and again and again.
Are you going to be the person that says one side is stealing but the other side isn't?
Your ignorance of this situation has been recorded on the blockchain forever.
Trust me, you'll feel better when I finish up this next post explaining how it is theft.
I understand this issue better than you do, and I'm arguing both sides.
I really don't think you do, but feel free to enlighten me. I'm working on a post as well :)