RE: A better approach to Turing Complete Smart Contracts by stellabelle

View this thread on: hive.blog | peakd.com | ecency.com

Viewing a response to: @dantheman/a-better-approach-to-turing-complete-smart-contracts

blockchain · @stellabelle · Oct 28 '16 (edited)

$0.17

Glad to see you posting an update. The coming changes are indeed good, however, they don't address the main reason users are fleeing: centralization of power and the feeling that their voices don't in fact matter. Is there any roadmap as far as fixing the problems with centralization of power?
Also, more updates, even in a smaller, "nuggetized" fashion would be highly recommended. Even if it was just to give users a generic update like "I'm swamped!" People go nuts when they don't hear from you, me included.

👍 stellabelle, chitty, gogumacat

`author`	stellabelle
`permlink`	re-dantheman-a-better-approach-to-turing-complete-smart-contracts-20161028t203035656z
`category`	blockchain
`json_metadata`	{"tags":["blockchain"]}
`created`	2016-10-28 20:30:36
`last_update`	2016-10-28 20:32:30
`depth`	1
`children`	3
`last_payout`	2016-11-28 22:34:33
`cashout_time`	1969-12-31 23:59:59
`total_payout_value`	0.163 HBD
`curator_payout_value`	0.003 HBD
`pending_payout_value`	0.000 HBD
`promoted`	0.000 HBD
`body_length`	513
`author_reputation`	516,061,669,130,124
`root_title`	"A better approach to Turing Complete Smart Contracts"
`beneficiaries`	`[]`
`max_accepted_payout`	1,000,000.000 HBD
`percent_hbd`	10,000
`post_id`	1,641,815
`net_rshares`	2,474,423,225,245
`author_curate_reward`	""

properties (23)vote details (3)

voter	rshares	pct
chitty	288,629,331,927	100%
stellabelle	2,185,793,893,318	100%
gogumacat	0	100%

@dantheman · Oct 28 '16

I just posted an update via @steemitblog that addresses some of those issues.  I spend a lot of time thinking about robust long-term solutions to decentralize power while maintaining order.

👍 bitshares101, blockchainbilly, timcliff, bitcoiner, jeremylarter

`author`	dantheman
`permlink`	re-stellabelle-re-dantheman-a-better-approach-to-turing-complete-smart-contracts-20161028t203732304z
`category`	blockchain
`json_metadata`	{"tags":["blockchain"],"users":["steemitblog"]}
`created`	2016-10-28 20:37:18
`last_update`	2016-10-28 20:37:18
`depth`	2
`children`	2
`last_payout`	2016-11-28 22:34:33
`cashout_time`	1969-12-31 23:59:59
`total_payout_value`	0.000 HBD
`curator_payout_value`	0.000 HBD
`pending_payout_value`	0.000 HBD
`promoted`	0.000 HBD
`body_length`	189
`author_reputation`	240,292,002,602,347
`root_title`	"A better approach to Turing Complete Smart Contracts"
`beneficiaries`	`[]`
`max_accepted_payout`	1,000,000.000 HBD
`percent_hbd`	10,000
`post_id`	1,641,871
`net_rshares`	48,618,255,689
`author_curate_reward`	""

properties (23)vote details (5)

voter	rshares	pct
bitshares101	15,656,553,133	100%
blockchainbilly	13,183,665,208	97%
bitcoiner	9,749,421,710	100%
timcliff	10,028,615,638	20%
jeremylarter	0	100%

@knircky · Oct 29 '16

I disagree with stellabelle and many others that whale power is a problem. It is also what makes steem work and work differently from kyher platforms. The dilution is a solution to this.

properties (22)

`author`	knircky
`permlink`	re-dantheman-re-stellabelle-re-dantheman-a-better-approach-to-turing-complete-smart-contracts-20161029t080516476z
`category`	blockchain
`json_metadata`	{"tags":["blockchain"]}
`created`	2016-10-29 08:05:18
`last_update`	2016-10-29 08:05:18
`depth`	3
`children`	0
`last_payout`	2016-11-28 22:34:33
`cashout_time`	1969-12-31 23:59:59
`total_payout_value`	0.000 HBD
`curator_payout_value`	0.000 HBD
`pending_payout_value`	0.000 HBD
`promoted`	0.000 HBD
`body_length`	186
`author_reputation`	212,905,587,244,262
`root_title`	"A better approach to Turing Complete Smart Contracts"
`beneficiaries`	`[]`
`max_accepted_payout`	1,000,000.000 HBD
`percent_hbd`	10,000
`post_id`	1,644,684
`net_rshares`	0

@stellabelle · Oct 28 '16

ok, thanks. I'll check that out now.

properties (22)