Steemit Is a Social Network That Pays You For Your Posts In Cryptocurrency (wired.com)

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Steemit Is a Social Network That Pays You For Your Posts In Cryptocurrency (wired.com)

Posted by msmash on Wednesday October 4, 2017 @04:40AM from the interesting-developments dept.

New submitter mirandakatz writes: Our relationships with most social media are sneakily transactional: We log onto Facebook or Instagram and wind up paying the platforms with our attention and ad clicks. A new social network aims to turn that on its head by paying users for their posts. Steemit runs on Steem, a cryptocurrency that currently has a market cap of $294 million -- and users have made more than $1.2 million in American dollars on the network. At Backchannel, Andrew McMillen takes a deep dive into Steemit, writing that 'By removing the middlemen and allowing users to profit directly from the networks they participate in, Steemit could provide a roadmap to a more equitable social network...Or users could get bored or distracted by something newer and shinier and abandon it. Fortunes could vanish at any moment, but someone stands to get rich in the process.'

54 comments

Min score:

Reason:

Sort:

time to fire up the bots by Anonymous Coward · 2017-10-04 04:45 · Score: 0

the russians and chinese will love this.
1. Re: time to fire up the bots by Anonymous Coward · 2017-10-05 04:50 · Score: 0
  
  If the bots are posting stuff that people view, then I don't see a problem.
Facebook should pay too by Anonymous Coward · 2017-10-04 04:50 · Score: 0

The company would be worth next to nothing without posts from users.
1. Re:Facebook should pay too by Anonymous Coward · 2017-10-04 05:16 · Score: 0
  
  So should slashdot, reddit, hacker news. And nightclub owners should pay hot chicks that drum up their business. But capitalists are greedy so ...
2. Re:Facebook should pay too by amicusNYCL · 2017-10-04 05:35 · Score: 1
  
  But if Facebook already has a product that requires no cost, why would they pay them? Facebook gets their product for free, other than the engineering work they do, they have no reason to spend money to get the product at this point.
  This Steemit, on the other hand, is something else entirely. It renders completely moot the question of wondering who the attention seekers are, versus who are just the paid shills. Now you know it's everybody! Everybody is seeking attention, and they're all paid. When there's a profit motive for literally every single post, then you realize that you don't need to pay attention to any of it. I guess it's good for whatever size the group of users is who want to be involved in something like that, but for everyone else hopefully it will concentrate those kinds of personalities in one place and have the effect of clearing up cruft in other places.
  
  --
  "Our two-party system is like a bowl of shit looking at itself in a mirror." - Lewis Black
3. Re:Facebook should pay too by postbigbang · 2017-10-04 05:44 · Score: 1
  
  This implies Steemit becomes a meritrocracy. What opens is the Pandora's box of bidding for the highest producing posts. That system works for a while until someone comes by with deeper pockets to capture marketshare. The value of its currency then drops down, and supply/demand makes it more difficult, until the market burns itself out for want of customers.
  It's intriguing but it's a zero-sum game, ultimately.
  
  --
  ---- Teach Peace. It's Cheaper Than War.
4. Re:Facebook should pay too by plague911 · 2017-10-04 05:59 · Score: 1
  
  The same can be said for all social media and their drive to retain customers,
5. Re:Facebook should pay too by Applehu+Akbar · 2017-10-04 08:18 · Score: 2
  
  This Steemit, on the other hand, is something else entirely. It renders completely moot the question of wondering who the attention seekers are, versus who are just the paid shills. Now you know it's everybody!
  But can Steemit really pay more for posts than Monsanto, the company that pays for every post we disagree with?
6. Re:Facebook should pay too by BozoForPresident · 2017-10-04 08:23 · Score: 1
  
  So should slashdot, reddit, hacker news. And nightclub owners should pay hot chicks that drum up their business. But capitalists are greedy so ...
  Aha. Yeah, I wonder why there aren't any economically illiterate, perpetually lazy, whiny little bitch Marxist business owners that see things your way...
7. Re: Facebook should pay too by Anonymous Coward · 2017-10-05 04:52 · Score: 1
  
  You act like shills don't exist. There are certainly sites that pay people to post. There are also clubs who employ hot chicks to hang out in them.
  It's like you were born yesterday.
That sounds stupid by Anonymous Coward · 2017-10-04 04:52 · Score: 0

n/t
Good idea by nospam007 · 2017-10-04 04:55 · Score: 1

Steamy is a Social Network That Pays You For Your Porn In Cryptocurrency.
1. Re:Good idea by Baron_Yam · 2017-10-04 05:11 · Score: 2
  
  I think you've almost struck on something there - imagine paying quality posters with credits for porn services!
Hey Slashdot by PPH · 2017-10-04 04:56 · Score: 3, Funny

How much will you pay me not to post?

--
Have gnu, will travel.
1. Re:Hey Slashdot by Anonymous Coward · 2017-10-04 05:55 · Score: 0
  
  Lump sum to stop posting forever? Or would you allow me to pay a monthly fee?
2. Re:Hey Slashdot by PPH · 2017-10-04 08:47 · Score: 1
  
  Per post.
  
  --
  Have gnu, will travel.
Worthless money for worthless content by swb · 2017-10-04 04:59 · Score: 1

Now you're talking value!!
1. Re:Worthless money for worthless content by Hognoxious · 2017-10-04 09:27 · Score: 1
  
  I didn't know slashdot was running a competition to create a new slogan[1], but you won!
  [1] Or whatever "News for nerds, stuff that matters" was. It's been so long since my media studies M.A. ...
  
  --
  Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
Valve will sue by tepples · 2017-10-04 04:59 · Score: 1

Steemit runs on Steem, a cryptocurrency that currently has a market cap of $294 million
Can you buy PC games on Steam with Steem?
1. Re:Valve will sue by Anonymous Coward · 2017-10-04 05:13 · Score: 0
  
  Valve will probably just buy it out. Those idiots love a well-beaten horse.
2. Re: Valve will sue by Anonymous Coward · 2017-10-04 05:13 · Score: 0
  
  One can only hope they will be sued into oblivion.
  Just pay me to do nothing, yeah great plan.
3. Re:Valve will sue by Oswald+McWeany · 2017-10-04 05:43 · Score: 1
  
  Valve might have a case to sue. My initial thought at first glance was that this was a "Steam" social network. That's all it takes to sue is a chance a customer might confuse the companies. It isn't too far beyond what Steam already does to think they might attempt something like this. I think some people might get confused by the names... absolutely a case to sue.
  
  --
  "That's the way to do it" - Punch
4. Re:Valve will sue by CanHasDIY · 2017-10-04 05:59 · Score: 1
  
  .. Since when is Valve involved in cryptocurrency and social networking?
  In a useful and effective way, that is. Most people's "Community" page is as blank as my own.
  
  --
  An enigma, wrapped in a riddle, shrouded in bacon and cheese
5. Re: Valve will sue by Anonymous Coward · 2017-10-04 06:21 · Score: 0
  
  People's pages are but the game pages are straight up public forums.
  And they have those trading cards you can make a penny off of sometimes.
6. Re: Valve will sue by Anonymous Coward · 2017-10-04 06:50 · Score: 0
  
  Forums != social networks
7. Re: Valve will sue by Khyber · 2017-10-04 09:18 · Score: 1
  
  Dumbass, the forum (next to the BBS) was one of THE original forms of a social network.
  
  --
  Still waiting on Serviscope_minor to wake up to fucking reality and realize that Jessica Price isn't going to fuck him.
8. Re:Valve will sue by Oswald+McWeany · 2017-10-05 00:16 · Score: 1
  
  .. Since when is Valve involved in cryptocurrency and social networking?
  In a useful and effective way, that is. Most people's "Community" page is as blank as my own.
  Cryptocurrency maybe not yet; but they're already a social network. Not everyone uses them as one, but they are very much setup as one. Incorporating cryptocurrency isn't a far stretch. Especially since they're already handling money and have their own form of currency in the form of "badges" and "Stickers" already. (obviously not the same thing- but they've been dabbling in the speculating with those things for a while).
  
  --
  "That's the way to do it" - Punch
Printing money by Anonymous Coward · 2017-10-04 04:59 · Score: 0

So they make up their own currency, then give it away to try and get it in use. Maybe I'll do the same tomorrow.
1. Re: Printing money by Anonymous Coward · 2017-10-04 19:40 · Score: 0
  
  Well you already use such money. The US dollar was printed up and given away - except it wasnt given to you!! It was given to banks and it has diminishing value as its not backed by anything, it costs 4c to print as opposed to 100's to mine and it has no hard cap as it can be orinted forever. It's best to see US dollars as tokens yoy are forced to use and have to exchange your crypto for.
uBlock Didn't Block This Article by Anonymous Coward · 2017-10-04 05:17 · Score: 0

Guess these sneaky Slashdot editors found a weakness!
Steamer by Anonymous Coward · 2017-10-04 05:18 · Score: 0

Made in Cleveland.
1. Re:Steamer by tomhath · 2017-10-04 05:27 · Score: 1
  
  Steamer is the mascot of the Altoona Curve, a minor league baseball team.
What's their stance on censorship? by Anonymous Coward · 2017-10-04 05:20 · Score: 0

The problem with existing social media sites doesn't really involve being paid for content or interaction.
The problem with existing social media sites, including Slashdot to some extent, is the overt censorship that so often happens.
Let's look at Reddit as an example. Aside from a very small number of token subreddits, it's quite common to have your comments removed or to be banned from most of the major subreddits if you express a centrist/moderate or right-wing viewpoint of any sort. The only acceptable comments tend to be ones that express ideas compatible with extreme-left narratives. Even some moderate leftists find themselves getting censored just because the ideas they express aren't far enough to the left!
Slashdot might not be as bad as some of the other sites, as the content here typically isn't removed. But we still have to browse at -1 all of the time in order to view good content that has been modded down wrongly. Slashdot's broken moderation system ends up becoming a mild and pointless form of censorship, because it hides perfectly fine content by default. Instead of highlighting the best comments, it ends up highlighting mindless drivel, with the most thought-provoking comments at -1. Since we have to browse at -1 all of the time, Slashdot might as well just get rid of its broken moderation system.
So this Steemit site sounds to me like it's focusing on a problem that doesn't really exist, and I'm not seeing how it would help address the major problem that does exist: censorship.
1. Re:What's their stance on censorship? by swb · 2017-10-04 05:44 · Score: 1
  
  I hear this complaint about Reddit, but I don't really see it much.
  The only place I see it is in a sub for my own local city. My city is admittedly very, very liberal, but this sub is overrun with bike advocates and antifa supporters. I've been downvoted into oblivion for having normal sentiments any property owner would have (like objecting to homeless people camping and peeing nearby), but nobody has banned me for it.
  Most of the subs I visit, though, have very little political content. Usually you get downvoted just for shitposting or being way off topic, which is mostly fair.
  I think Reddit's biggest problem isn't censorship but just high levels of shitposting and relentless memeposting, but mostly this is a "major" subreddit problem, not a niche subreddit problem. It's kind of no different than USENET was.
2. Re:What's their stance on censorship? by Anonymous Coward · 2017-10-04 05:58 · Score: 0
  
  Of course you "don't really see it [censorship] much". That's the whole point of censorship: denying access to information, often including evidence that the censorship is happening.
  Unless a reddit user is the victim of censorship, or the perpetrator of censorship, or continually monitoring for content that has been removed, the user will typically have no idea when censorship has happened. So of course you don't think something is happening much when you're not observing it happening!
  It's also strange that you claim it doesn't happen much, yet you yourself say you've been "downvoted into oblivion", which is also a form of censorship. The whole point of downvoting somebody's comment is to try to get it below the minimum threshold of other users, so that they don't see the comment unless they put effort into seeing it. That's censorship.
3. Re:What's their stance on censorship? by Anonymous Coward · 2017-10-04 05:59 · Score: 0
  
  Just like there's inappropriate places for protesting (like in the middle of the interstate) there are inappropriate places for whining about NFL players and what not.
4. Re:What's their stance on censorship? by Anonymous Coward · 2017-10-04 06:21 · Score: 0
  
  Let's look at Reddit as an example. Aside from a very small number of token subreddits, it's quite common to have your comments removed or to be banned from most of the major subreddits if you express a centrist/moderate or right-wing viewpoint of any sort.
  It's not classic censorship though. Each subreddit has its moderation team and its own rules---both of which are established by the user that created it. If there is a problem, it's caused by the users themselves. This isn't a problem that any social media site can readily solve.
  Also, don't blame the liberals. It goes both ways. It is very easy to get banned on conservative subreddits as well. Some, such as /r/The_Donald, are notorious for it.
  The site as a whole has a very permissive policy, and typically only threats, hate material, harassment, spam/abuse, or doxxing will result in an official response.
5. Re:What's their stance on censorship? by swb · 2017-10-04 06:51 · Score: 1
  
  My only suggestion would be that the threshold for posts "disappearing" should be higher -- maybe -20 or something, or some obvious way to restore them for users who want to see them or some kind of threaded sort that ignores votes.
6. Re:What's their stance on censorship? by KingTank · 2017-10-04 07:46 · Score: 1
  
  Censorship is a must, I'm afraid. Anyone who has experimented with creating a ugc website has discovered this. If you don't censor at all, your site gets taken over by child porn. If you censor only child porn, it gets taken over by mostly legal porn. If you censor all porn, it gets taken over by spammers. If you censor porn and spammers, it gets taken over by nazis.
7. Re: What's their stance on censorship? by Anonymous Coward · 2017-10-04 19:34 · Score: 0
  
  But reddit is ironically one of the main social networks used by crypto currency people. Cryptocurrencies are most favoured by right wing people as a store of wealth. Reddit could end up losing a massive market.
waiting for approval by Anonymous Coward · 2017-10-04 05:22 · Score: 0

Signed up but waiting for approval. Does this mean that, like most things crypto, there's a scaling problem. Or that they've been /.ed or wired and their bot patrol is human? The wait for approval seems strange for a wanna-be social network but decentralized is eventually going to kill Facebook and Uber and AirBnB etc (for a particularly broad definition of 'kill') and I, for one, would rather post out into the crypto tulip farms than lurk talking points flamewarring on Facebook.
Are they paying the Russians who shit up Slashdot? by Anonymous Coward · 2017-10-04 05:31 · Score: 0

Just kidding, MAGA bigly! Trump is great (so much "winning") and Putin on horseback is very sexy!
-Real Americanski from Texas Oblast
not buying it by Anonymous Coward · 2017-10-04 05:41 · Score: 0

More and more little schemes keep popping up, where you are supposedly being paid in some kind of concurrency. Upon further research it becomes clear that this is a newly created currency, which cannot be readily converted to bitcoin or USD, and also cannot be used for much else. So you are being paid in worthless crap.
And after they pay you ...? by fahrbot-bot · 2017-10-04 05:46 · Score: 1

And after they pay you for your information, is it theirs to do whatever they want? Seems like it should be so, since they just bought it from you.

--
It must have been something you assimilated. . . .
Only a matter of time by Anonymous Coward · 2017-10-04 05:50 · Score: 0

This will be gamed. Interesting idea.
This is an amazing fraud by Anonymous Coward · 2017-10-04 06:09 · Score: 0

I mean can someone explain to me how the blockchain has anything to do with this? Afaik the blockchain is just a distributed version of a public ledger. It never verifies whether the information being inputted into it is legitimate, it just assumes it is and stores it for everyone to see.
So you can still commit fraud with this system. From the article:
" The community would have to evaluate each claim, voting the best posts towards the top."
So, you don't get paid until the community decides you get paid? And then, what if I just make a million bots that all say my posts are amazing? The voting doesn't seem to use the blockchain.
This isn't a new idea, its just bullshit with new buzzwords. "Blockchain! Cryptocurrencies! Computers!" No one in this company know what any of that means. They're just using it to make money.
Sidetick tried this by Anonymous Coward · 2017-10-04 06:44 · Score: 0

Wonder what happened to them?
Lol
It is. by Anonymous Coward · 2017-10-04 08:15 · Score: 0

But at least now you can get paid for writing on steemit. The best-paying articles are, of course, those true and honest success stories detailing how steemit transformed your life, and how every reader should join in with this digital revolution. In fact, those are just about the only articles on there. So write yours today, and start earning some of that steemit interwebz moniez!
Feature Request: Regional Specificity by Anonymous Coward · 2017-10-04 08:23 · Score: 0

Hopefully this platform can finally address the for-profit social networking needs of Cleveland's many Steemers
MILITARY RESPONSE by Anonymous Coward · 2017-10-04 12:00 · Score: 0

Any company that tries to force people into using a crypto, is subject to a military response.
That's not a threat, it's simply something people have been saying. Many people view Crypto currencies as a direct threat on freedom.
Am I missing something? by Neuronwelder · 2017-10-04 14:10 · Score: 1

Or is this a thinly veiled attempt at money laundering?
The Future by QlooQl · 2017-10-05 08:18 · Score: 1

People are failing to see the big picture. Imagine if Facebook started paying you in cryptocurrency (FACE) for every post and picture you posted. Then they created a market where advertisers could buy the tokens and use them to buy ad space. A crazy feedback loops would develop as people addicted to FB turned posting their kid's pics into full-time jobs and Facebook's world domination would be complete.