How to be a 2-faced hypocrite in 3 easy steps. Also, will Bittrex do the right thing or cave?
I've watched this Justin sun drama unfold for a while. Every time I thought he couldn't be a worse ass hat I've been wrong. What a monumental bastard.
Anyway, this rant is on the "they are thieves" side of things, as in Justin is calling Hivians Thieves for not having aidropped Hive to all Steem users. What's ironic and idiotic is that he's using code the Hive witnesses wrote to punish Steem accounts. So, he's pointing at them and calling them thieves and using the literal exact same code to target freeze and steal funds.. Anyone who can't realize the hypocrisy there needs their head examined.
Here's the difference though. Hive is a new blockchain, new name, and the people here can create consensus however they see fit. Steem is a different blockchain, but HF23 didn't create a brand new blockchain. People expect that with hardforks the code can change, but their assets stay safe. As Dan noted on twitter, Steem fell to a sybil attack. Funds aren't SAFU. The attackers, Justin via his puppets, used their weight to steal funds from user accounts. What a shit show. That's not consensus... that's a what a malicious attack looks like on the blockchain level.
It's pretty simple. You're not entitled to anything on a new chain. You are entitled to fund safety on an existing chain. I continue to think that not awarding those accounts Hive was a bad idea, and that much of this bullshit could have been avoided if the airdrop had been to all non-steemit accounts. But even though I disagree I respect the right of the founders of Hive to define consensus how they see fit here. When you venture out to create a new blockchain with a new name you can do as you see fit. The founders have every right to not include Justin Sun or anyone else on a new chain.
To add insult to injury. We heard on the Clown Hall how people were being bribed to run a Steem witness. I mean, that's pretty low to me. If you're taking outside money to run a witness and bow to Justin that's pretty disgusting. If you're going along with a heist from community members you're a low life criminal.
Anyway, what's extra driving me nutz is how crytokaren aka Justin Sun is complaining about theft of assets while using the same code and somehow justifying it. They are complaining about how things happened on Hive and using the EXACT SAME CODE TO DO THE EXACT SAME THING ON STEEM. What a flaming asshole. Not only is he targeting accounts that acted against his will, but he's targeting accounts that haven't even been active in years. The whole thing just boggles my mind. This is nothing more than a crypto heist.
Steem isn't SAFU. You might be able to bend the knee and get a load from Justin, but everything about that place is so tainted.
Bittrex I think should be smart enough to know the difference here between a legit community consensus and the equivalent of a 51% attack being carried out. Private companies don't always grow spines, but here's hoping they do.
I've taken some shit for keeping my witness running on Steem. I think we all would have been better off if rather than leaving in a huff we all kept the witnesses running. 23 and even some of the soft forks could have been prevented until everyone got their steem out.
Lastly, to whichever Korean double crossed their conspirators I'd like to thank you. I don't know how many people had access to the keys, but someone over there deserves a big hug. Either that or R0n... but I don't think he coulda done it.
PS as an intentional act of bastardry I have decided to not actually put 3 easy steps in this post. Muh ha ha ha ha ha ha.
@aggroed I believe the bittrex will do the rightful things and return the hard earned money to the members. @theycallmedan and others have invested seriously and why steal from them!
I bet Darthknight is all over Bittrex for that epic typo he made lol seems like a nice guy giving out random strong votes. Hope him and others get the Steem they had.
It's not a typo. It's another of his accounts
Bittrix was his account?
Do you foresee any scenario where the funds are returned to the community321 wallet and would still be able to be recovered/transferred to safe haven before being frozen and awaiting the next fork for "re-seizure?" That's honestly my only hope right now given the fact that Justin/Tron seem so incompetent on the Steem blockchain and could still possibly be outwitted.
If by consensus community321 owns the coins from Bittrex's perspective, community321 is entitled to ask bittrex to act as custodian and distribute funds on his behalf. The Bittrex argument is ostensibly to protect blockchain sovereignty, while at the same time ignoring individual sovereignty. According to Bittrex's own logic, @community321 could offer Bittrex money to distribute the funds to whom ever they choose. His key, his coins right? Even a fee of 10% is a sizable sum, but at the same time, I think most former steem holders would gladly pay it.
I see the same interpretation that Bittrex is going to honor the current keyholder, which is good... but I'm unsure if they have a set process. I hope they'll enable the account owner to verify and provide a proper wallet memo via customer support, but I'm afraid they'll insist on sending it back to the originating wallet, which would of course make it vulnerable to a transaction freeze.
lol...You know, I think your ommission of the three easy steps will not impede those two-faced people being two-faced...Seems it comes naturally.
I'm hoping for an amicable resolution...The right resolution too!
Thieves always calls others thieves that's their mentality, but as you said we should have waited little longer in the Steem witness and let everyone give a chance to burn their Steem. So this theft wouldn't had happened
Well they'll have no option but to do the right thing at least for their reputation and well for the sake of starting on a clean slate again
I also agree that the HIVE airdrop was a critical mistake and should have been given to all non-Steem inc. accounts regardless. The exclusion of certain accounts was an unbalanced decision owing largely to emotions. Strategically, it was an error, in my opinion. The HIVE token may have performed less well in the short term as Steem supporters would have surely dumped the majority of their Hive holdings but the break would have been cleaner. In the longterm, people would see the obvious superiority of the Hive chain, the community presence, a stable and secure network in contrast with the unfeasibility and insecurity of the old chain. Just my thoughts, thanks for posting your, cheers.
I disagree and ask you consider the following(and please do suggest counter points :))
Air dropping to bad actors will get more bad actions from those bad actors, the very actions we forked to get away from
Nobody is entitled to be part of any given community, these people were not invited into our "village" because they are anti our village
Nobody is entitled to the work of others(all the work HF involved/planning/etc), I am thankful I was air dropped Hivepower so I have resources to perform actions on this chain
People who are anti-hive/troublemakers would dump coins causing price instability for the medium term which would make us look less credible(BTC is worth more, must be the REAL BITCOIN! ;0)
Those who think they should get the air drop from what I understand can submit a proposal to ask for those coins, but they are not entitled to them
These are exactly 100% my thoughts as well. Thanks for saving me time :-)
It wasn't an airdrop. It's a split fork. Therefore, no one is "giving" anyone anything.
Wasn't a blockchain protocol supposed to be censorship free? Excluding those that only voted (no matter their personal reasons) is a kind of censorship, because you are removing their access because your disagree with their opinion.
Therefore, this move goes against a basic blockchain philosophical fundament.
(Steemit Inc. stake should be removed because it was was caused the attack.)
I don't think this have anything related to anyone's hardwork...
It's about fundamental principles.
The moment you deny other people access to a blockchain because you don't agree with their opinion and because they "could" (a big could) attack the blockchain, isn't the real problem on the blockchain code?
So, the price is more important than the integrity and reliability of the blockchain?
Sure, price can affect the short-term view of a blockchain, but aren't we supposed to be in this for the long-term?
Wich put the decisionat the hands of very few people (those with the bigger stakes). What if they don't like the color of that person hair? Is it fair?
A great example of how bad this was is the case of @steemchiller. He created one of the best Steem wallet/explorer, and he was excluded from hive because half of his votes were to Justin Sun because he wanted to stand neutral expecting things to work out between both parties.
Now, imagine how many potential developers/content creators/community leaders hive lost because of this "petty revenge" decision.
I won't get too technical on that part, but given it was a 1 to 1 ratio for 1 SP = 1 HP I can concede that point. Most people would say they were air dropped coins from a split so that's the way I was phrasing it.
Therefore, this move goes against a basic blockchain philosophical fundament.
(Steemit Inc. stake should be removed because it was was caused the attack.)
Excluding people from having staked power in a blockchain fork isn't censorship. Those people who didn't get the 1 to 1 ratio of SP to HP still have accounts, can still power those accounts up, can perform functions with the default 3 HP they have delegated to them. Nobody removed their access to anything. There is no censorship there.
Censorship is what Steemit INC is doing by censoring posts from people who are even remotely critical of them(I myself have multiple posts censored from appearing on Steemit for speaking out against Justin Sun)
Theft is also what Steemit INC and all witnesses are doing when they vote for a fork to steal cryptocurrency from users. The law of the land clearly defines cryptocurrency as Property or Money in almost every country. Taking away someones property/money/cryptocurrency without their consent IS THEFT.
Steemit INCs stake was ill gotten and done via deception in the very beginning when almost nobody knew how to mine Steem. They took advantage of a loophole by avoiding doing an ICO and instead mined in almost complete secrecy. They were successful in skirting laws of the land. They started off in a legally ambiguous manner, and when it was discovered they did that people were upset and rightly so. The ill gotten mined power should have lost its voting rights in my opinion, and if it was sold whoever bought it would also have no voting rights. It could still be used for other purposes like creating accounts and should have been used for positive building.
The entire Steem chain is the hardwork of all the witnesses + Steemit employees.... All of which the Steemit employees who wrote the code for Steem have almost all quit and joined Hive. So you are dead wrong there.
Nobody was denied access to the chain as stated above, users who did not get HP when the fork happened have full access to everything.
They were not "denied HP" due to their opinion, it was due to how they voted which is a specific criteria. Their voting to centralize is a problem and we don't want that in this community. A big attack did happen from those who voted for Justin Sun. The problem is psychopath controllers like Justin Sun and governments and dictators, the blockchain is an attempt to make these types of psychopaths have less power over individuals.
Sure, price can affect the short-term view of a blockchain, but aren't we supposed to be in this for the long-term?
I never said the price is more important than the integrity and reliability of the blockchain. You did though. I did however mention it is a factor that was thought of.
A great example of how bad this was is the case of @steemchiller. He created one of the best Steem wallet/explorer, and he was excluded from hive because half of his votes were to Justin Sun because he wanted to stand neutral expecting things to work out between both parties.
Now, imagine how many potential developers/content creators/community leaders hive lost because of this "petty revenge" decision.
I haven't seen any evidence of someone being denied HP via the proposal system because someone didn't like their hair. Maybe you have that evidence and you can show it?
Steemchiller helped an authoritarian take over the Steem chain. People tried to negotiate with Hitler and Stalin and Mao too, it doesn't work. JS is corrupt and all of his previous dealings with other crypto show time and time again he scams everyone he can.
Nothing was petty revenge.
Can't disagree with that. Last JS move was nothing more than theft.
Hive witness move wasn't. But the issue i see with denying users stake on a forked chain is because this creates a bad precedent.
Sure, good intentions to protect the chain and all, but have your heard the phrase "The road to hell is paved with good intentions".?
Hive witness decision set a precedent were there is a possibility that this kind of move can be done again.
Will it happen? Maybe yes, maybe no. I can't vouche for anything that goes one anyone else's mind.
But the problem is that precedent put the new chain on a position that the possibility of the same shit JS pulled on Steem can be done by Hive actual witness.
Because they already did something kind of similar by denying some people access to the forked funds because of how they voted.
It would be more understandable only those with public close ties to Steemit and JS were excluded from the new chain.
I am not denying there is some specific people's hard work involved, and the results affect them in a more direct way.
But the issue is the focus on the problem.
Instead of direct the discussion toward how to improve the code in a way that this kind of take-over becomes way harder to happen, everyone just focused on excluding the bad actors.
That doesn't solve the problem. Nothing is stopping new bad actors to come by and pull the same take over, decreasing even more the reliability of the hive chain.
Do you know sarcasm?
Let me explain then, if you don't.
Big stakes define the results of a SPS.
Most of the big stakers were somehow involved on the decision of excluding these people.
Therefore, the final decision is still theirs. And each one will act according to their own desires, including not liking the person, no matter if they have done anything good or not towards the hive development.
Vote is a way to express an opinion.
If someone voted 50/50 they wished to keep the lockdown between both parties. Those that i talked with about why they did like that it was because they weren't happy with any of the sides, and was awaiting to see wich side would act in the best way, or if a good agreement would be reached between both sides.
I see the airdrop as an entitlement, and the basis of entitlements generally revolve around the concept of social equality. By excluding a handful because of how they chose to vote, we not only undermined the sanctity of the vote but also disenfranchised those individuals. If we shift and say the airdrop was not an entitlement, but rather a "gift," then it ends up looking like a payoff for those who voted "correctly."
Ultimately, because of the nature of reality, those with money will seek power. Is it right to take people's money away? Generally, the answer to this question is no. But what if they are going to use their money to destroy or monopolize a public resource? Right there, you're getting into the antitrust type of laws. Bill gates got wrecked with that, and that didn't even stop him from seeking ultimate power and control.
The problem of the wealthy putting their boots on the neck of the poor is age-old, but it doesn't justify a mass culling of people based on their political ideologies. I think if those people got mirrored here on HIVE and saw that their token had a higher value than Steem, it would behoove them to retain and celebrate their stake.
They could have what in their eyes is the best of both worlds, a blockchain run by Sun and a token of a higher value run by a community. The competition between the two chains will result in a winner and a loser. The Stakeholders will be inclined to side with, or at the very least, not be in opposition to the victor.
Excluding Sun and his socks was reasonable, all things considered. Taking an additional 300 out based on arbitrary metrics was overkill. Now, they're in this guilty until proven innocent limbo and are forced to beg the community for inclusion. I wouldn't do it. I'd rather eat my shoe.
You've also got to consider that some of the consensus-of-stake may have been intentionally voting in such a way as to stop both parties from doing any more stupid shit.
Greeting the largest stakeholder with an immediate asset freeze right after a multimillion-dollar purchase was the first mistake as far as I'm concerned. If we assume the largest stakeholder is a threat, where does it end? There will always be a largest stakeholder. I think the community should have put him on notice in a public post that if he attempts to fork with astroturf witnesses, the chain will split.
The key point being they have to ask for Hivepower, not to ask for being part of the Hive blockchain. Their account exists on the chain and has the usual 3 Hive delegated to it so it can perform a few functions per day.
Right, so, their balance was censored on the mirrored accounts. However, they have the option of throwing themselves at the mercy of stakeholders who didn't vote outside of "the party."
It wasn't just because people voted for Justin's witness.
Justin could have run one witness node, and people were more than free to vote for it if they thought that his ideas were good for Steem.
However, he did NOT start one witness node ... instead he started 20 of them! And then he voted for all 20 of his own nodes with stake that was never meant to be voted with in the first place. He even used Exchange staked to vote in all 20 of his puppet accounts, which is wrong on so many levels.
Then he forced out ALL 20 of the witnesses that we, the people, had chosen to represent us on Steem.
A single individual is NOT allowed to run multiple Witness accounts, let alone use Steemit Inc and Exchange power to vote in even 1 real Witness let alone 19 Fake Witnesses; pushing out EVERYBODY that the Steem community democratically chose.
So nobody should have voted for Justin Sun's puppet Witnesses after all that he did. Yet nobody had HIVE withheld if they had only voted for one of Justin's accounts. People were still free to choose to vote for such a disgusting dictator. However, the people who voted in several of his Witness nodes (when only one vote per witness has ever been allowed) were not given the gift of HIVE tokens.
Everything that Justin did absolutely disgusted me,
so I completely understand why the majority voted not to have HIVE given to those who willingly decided to be Justin's "Flying Monkeys" while he paints himself as a victim; when in fact Justin was the perpetrator of great evil on our community.
I've got this terrible curse of being able to put myself in almost anyone's shoes. When I think of it from Sun's position as a businessperson who fancies making money. He purchased more Steem than anyone in the history of Steem. He paid for it off-market and therefore made a killing. All of these things are what a businessperson might do.
But people got scared about what he might do with his stake, so much concentrated power in one man's hands is dangerous indeed, and the community desperately wanted to retain access to the stake reserved for development that was sold out from under them. Whether or not the contract with Ned about that SP was valid is up in the air, and probably something for lawyers or courts to hash out.
So because of worries of what Sun might do or not do with his stake, the witnesses decided to freeze his stake "temporarily," and this put Sun in a position of financial duress throughout the negotiation period. I think Sun panicked. He had just invested untold millions into a new front end and a lot of crypto, crypto that he no longer had control over because of the soft-fork.
Now his stake is in the hands of the community witnesses who can easily make it vanish, and this would completely obliterate his invested millions. I'm sure at that point, he saw the move as a blatant act of hostility, and therefore, resolved to do whatever he had to do to secure his investment, and that's when things really jumped the shark. He coopted the exchanges and put his astroturf witnesses into office.
Did he fight dirty, yes he most certainly did. But in all fairness, it was his money on the line, and the witnesses acted in bad faith when trying to get him to negotiate from a position of financial duress. Essentially they launched the first salvo in a financial/blockchain war with a billionaire.
blockchain activism ad
I can also see this problem unfold from the community's perspective, and I'm glad you commented to me because I was just reading the comment that you left truthforce, this, so that I can better comprehend opposing viewpoints. I do see why you are disgusted with Sun's behavior. War is an ugly thing. Censorship of posts, the hijacking of exchanges, and now he's censoring the stake of users under the guise of protecting the Steem network. In essence, he's mirroring the same moves that were used against him and other users whose stake that HIVE censored. It's the 44th law of power.
I wish that both sides would cut down on all the hostility and simply engage in healthy competition. This, as opposed to all the underhanded chicanery that I see going on, on both chains. There's plenty of room in the cryptosphere for two moderately successful social media blockchains, and if both sides de-escalate and mind their own business, then both can put more emphasis on-chain development as opposed to all this nasty blockchain warfare garbage. I'm hoping that soon either entity will show they are the better individual and cut down on the hostilities.
One point I might make about your comment here.
According to the tyrannical rule that is "dPoS" (aka the law of the Jungle), one person CAN run multiple witnesses. This is ugly, just like false flags on posts with real original content. I think that most people, including myself, highly disagree with the tactic and what he did. But also remember it was the community witnesses who forced him to take extreme measures to protect his investment.
Unfortunately, when dPoS and decentralization are at loggerheads, it causes decentralization to break, or private property to get confiscated. This is a fundamental problem that both Steem and HIVE need to look into fixing. I don't know if a fix is even possible, tbh. I cannot fathom how to, but some people have ideas on the matter. I just worry some of these ideas might destroy the token's market value.
As far as the exchange power is concerned, I did see a clever comment about modifying the ability of exchange accounts so they can't vote for witnesses. This seems like a reasonable solution to me, something that could probably get coded and acted upon fairly quickly.
One more point on this comment.
As far as I know, the censoring of stake on Steem's spiritual successor (HIVE) was never a thing that was voted on. If there was a vote, I sure didn't get the memo. The only thing I've voted for in the past were witnesses, and their job is to run the code and produce blocks. Meddling with the account balances of other HIVE folks (beyond STINC and their socks), I don't think that was their call. It's bad enough that we had to go down that road at all. But those extra 300 really took the cake if you believe in the integrity of the vote.
I agree @truthforce.
HIVE was created for people who believe in Decentralization.
This is what Steem originally stood for, but when Justin Sun took over the blockchain, and certain people supported him, it became easier to see who would rather have a platform run by a controlling entity.
I can understand that some people thought having Justin Sun in charge would make their Steem price increase because they hoped that he had the business savvy to do so (even though it seemed clear to me from the beginning that Justin Sun suffers from Narcissitic Personality Disorder and acts emotionally rather than doing what is best for his pocketbook)
... so those people who voted for Justin and several of his sockpuppet witness accounts simultaneously, got to keep all of their Steem and see how Justin steers the ship
... while the rest of us moved on to HIVE where we could continue our "decentralized" experiment.
The idea that anyone stole anyone else's HIVE, is such an entitled way of thinking. Our Steem home was stolen away from us by Justin, and we were forced to move to a new home. Of course we aren't going to give free gifts to the people who supported him in pushing us out!!
As far as I am concerned, the initial soft fork to temporarily freeze Justin's funds while we pursued discussions with him, has proven beyond a reasonable doubt to have been 100% the right move. Justin loves to blame everybody else for his temper tantrums and theft, but none of that is our fault; it is all the result of his personality disorder and irrational actions. But like a true narcissist, he can not accept one ounce of blame or even be a savvy businessman. At least the way things played out exposed Justin's true colors EARLY, and helped us move on early to our new home of HIVE.
Perhaps our only mistake was not creating HIVE sooner than we did.
I was THRILLED when I finally got the news that we all had a new home and renewed hope that our community could thrive afterall.
Yes! Justin Sun is a narcissist. Everything he does is to better himself and draw attention. He just keeps buying out other decentralized projects and takes them over.
So much food for thought in this reply and the replies to it. This is what I love about the Blockchain Community...the discussion on a topic, listen to all sides, and as an individual walk away with an understanding of the topic in which an individual may draw their own conclusion.
Nao entendi?Não entendi
Cave to whom?
Who else has made or can make a claim to the stolen funds? Justin said hf23 wasn't his, so the proceeds aren't his.
Justin lies with virtually every word that comes out of his mouth. He's probably sucking a few dicks in Bittrex right now, attempting to steal back the funds. Or maybe they're even running a new hardfork to fork out the funds from Bittrex account. I won't be surprised if the least bitm
That may be, but he's already in huge legal jeopardy with the caveat that one has to prove this was his work. If he tries to grab those funds for himself, it confirms what we all suspect and what the voting records on the chain suggests.
Judging by his actions, I don't see it as something he can't do. He really doesn't care about image and all that shit. He'll just go after money and force his authoritarian shit to get it. Time will tell anyways
Looks like Bittrex is gonna play Switzerland and just return the money to the community321 account.
Hopefully, and I would assume so, whoever took control of that account still has control. Then, they could get them their funds back, so they could get them to an exchange real quick before he can pull this stunt all over again.
I don't know much, but I'm a pretty good judge of character. Never heard of Justin Sun till he bought Steemit Inc., but I had a feeling about him as soon as I saw him. Unfortunately, I was right.
He is chinese do i have to say more?
That's racist.
lol
Actually phgnomo is 100% right.
One part of racism is the "he is XXX (color, nation, gender etc.), no further distinction necessary" categorisation. Even stronger so when a negative attitude is implied.
Justin Sun did a 51% attack for sure. He controlled more than what is necessary to have absolute control and he is exercising it. This has nothing to do with consensus is exactly right.
A key thing to highlight
Consensus cannot be achieved between Justin Sun and himself(makes no sense definitionally)
If Bittrex follows through by following consensus they are idiots.
If there is anything that I have learned from being in the crypto space, all exchanges given enough time turn out to be scammers or get hacked or "lose users funds".
Some exchanges have a better reputation than others, until the grifters take over and buy them out. JS owns part of Poloniex(correct me if it was another exchange I forget) and used his leverage to compel other exchanges into powering up users funds. The precedent is set, this will happen again and again going forward as there was not very much blow back. The only way I see around this is to invalidate powering up of specified exchange accounts, of which the witnesses would routinely update the list of official accounts. It would be a different kind of Hive account that has restrictions on it.
Decentralization requires eternal vigilance, I am confident someone will figure this out but that is my suggestion anyway.
Learn the definition of 51% attack before opening your mouth and pretending you know what you are talking about please
And here i was all set to invest in Tron.
They seemed good.
I wasn't hearing any complaints
... (most likely because they were silenced)
Mr. Tron has proven himself an asshat, a liar and a crook.
It was very informative to see that happen.
I saw what was wrong when Mr. Tron bought Ned's shares
The community saw it, the witnesses saw it... even McAfee saw it.
Mr. Tron to the steemit community:
Lol. Fucking clickbait, damn you!!!!
Sometimes life offers you Game of thrones style drama(without the last episode) and you just have to marvel at the shit storm, get some wipes and board up your windows. Other times, you can pick a side then dive into the the storm. Now I'm waiting for Bittrex, but I'm pretty sure that Cryptokaren is sucking a few dicks in the exchange to see how he can resteal the funds that were stolen from his initial stealing 😄.
Nicely said.
The thing that irritates me the most is his lack of understanding how blockchain works. Going further, he expected to recieve an airdrop after completely splitting the community? lol
Why would we create hf if the same thing will be applied there? After all he used his power to undermine our freedom, and giving him the same amount of power on the new chain is ridiculous.
Anyway, I'm glad seeing splinterlands migrate to Hive and taking first place on dapp radar.
its textbook sociopath behavior. Accuse someone else first of the thing you're planning on doing and you can play the victim while being the aggressor. Of course, these tactics work in the shadows, but we're on the fricking internet and his actions are all exposed for everyone to see. Justin really is an idiot for all intents and purposes, and antisocial guys like him are the reason wealth has a bad name these days.
Well, he did buy bitTorrent, which is a pretty bold statement that he isn't interested in digital property rights. I know not all torrented files are pirated, but if you are going to pirate anything digital, well...
I was waiting for the 3 steps. So disappointed lol
The sham witness thieves have have tried to masquerade as if this is a new fork like Hive and that it's an airdrop. They don't seem to realize even if they gave it a new identity, they destroyed the old one with intentional malice towards specific people, and they'd still be liable even if their fantasy were true.
Was the clown hall recorded?
LITERALLY everyone on Twitter that used this argument that we are thieves for not airdropping Hive for them has not answered me/stop talking/ blocked me when I asked them this simple question:
So, forking to another chain and forking the same chain is the same to you?
I'm waiting for their reply but I feel I will get none, which just says how much they understand code and the blockchain and how much they want to push some narrative that JS is pushing. PATHETIC.
I'm actually happy that you still have your STEEM Witness running. I am still voting for the old witnesses on STEEM.
mottler account is clear proof that this HF was nothing more than theft. they thought that they could just take over 2M from an account that is not active for 4 years, and there will be no one who will make a fus about it.
You're not entitled to anything on a new chain. You are entitled to fund safety on an existing chain.Except Hive is the same as the old Steem. Same users, same tech, same blocks. Hive is not a new chain, it's easy to prove in front of a jury.
By your definition ETC=ETH and BCH=BTC.
No one is entitled to air drops or forked chains that have a new "coin".
No one is entitled to fund safety on any chain either. We reasonably assume given analysis of any given chain of the fund safety of any given chain.
Right now I give the Steem chain a high risk of fund safety. Hive I give it a good risk of fund safety.
Not sure what happened to you as I always saw you are someone who was really intelligent who was making a really great product people need for decentralization. At some point Dtube totally stopped working for me and it didn't work for months so I gave up on it.
You seem to just go around and insulting people and be really bitter. Comparing the current you to the old you is vastly different. I actually used to read your comments and posts and enjoy what you had to say.
Are you ok? Like I am not even trolling or anything.
Why are you wasting time trolling online to people and being negative? Your profile says "be negative" as your quote.
Do you realizing there is no new coin? Renaming an asset doesn't make it 'new'. You got tricked into thinking that.
This whole blockchain (and the other one too) became a big shit-show, where deleting coins of people you don't like became the norm. That's all I been saying and look at my reputation (@blocktrades did it).
I'm not trolling. I'm just expressing my thoughts and making sure that there is still a minority of respectable people using this chain.
I'm doing really fine and so is dtube, I know many different things have been buggy or broken early on, but it's really more stable nowadays, give it a shot, it's compatible with 3 blockchains in parallel, so you can earn on 3 chains at the same time for your videos.
„ What a monumental bastard. „ ,well, I have no info considering his Parents, but his actions are evil in the real sense of the word.
Can you ask a question @aggroed?
Why @steemmonsters is still upvoting the posts in steem chain?
Why it is driving traffic and increasing the value of traffic in that blockchain?
Whatever！ glad to see you again. Let’s get to onboarding some new users !
Too little, too late.
This entire episode on Steemit blockchain, with Sun, shows me that DPoS is broken, unusable and a fail, as far as systems go. Give it up as a failed attempt at a blockchain. If this sort of problem can occur once, it can occur again and again in this so-called decentralized protocol, which we now see is not decentralized. 20 witnesses is never decentralized in my world. Even EOS failed to a couple of years ago when 1 rogue went against all the other witnesses and reversed a block. This is a fail, we need a better system guys. It's obvious to me.