The release of EOS is starting to cause a stir. What is going to happen when @dan's finest work becomes available to the world? While it destroy the other blockchains he created?
From what I can understand, EOS makes Bitshares and STEEM look slow. According to an interview with @stan, a transaction on EOS is going to take half a second. Like STEEM, there will be zero transactions fees if my understanding is correct.
EOS has a bit different goal than the other two projects. This is designed to be an operating system. From what I can garner, EOS can be integrated into other blockchains. The goal is to become the "world's computer". We saw a similar idea out of Ethereum, hence why some believe EOS might be the Ethereum killer.
So where does this leave Bitshares and STEEM?
According to an interview by CryptoConnie with @stan, Bitshares 3.0 is being embraced by the community. What is Bitshares 3.0? It is the integration with EOS to allow different chains to operate. This will give the Bitshares system the ability to handle the institutional business. Not only will Bitshares benefit from the features of EOS, this allows a chain to be built adhering to the regulations, something institutions require. At the same time, the existing model of Bitshares is still in place for those who do not fall under this category.
What makes this all very interesting is that BlockOne is not building a blockchain. This is the entity that is creating EOS. They are simply going to release it and let others build off it. That means there will most likely by many blockchains built using the EOS operating system. @stan mentioned the goal is to be able to project Bitshares into each EOS blockchain automatically. Perhaps some of the more technical people can explain how that would work.
Nevertheless, @stan stated the goal is to approach this in a way that makes both Bitshares and EOS more valuable. If what is mentioned here unfolds, I think it is safe to say that has a good chance of happening.
Where does @dan stand in all this?
Before going any further, I will state that all I am about to say is supposition based upon what I read and interviews. There is no first hand knowledge in any of this since I haven't ever interacted with @dan.
I watched in interview with him a while back where he stated that EOS was his final blockchain. He was asked if he would develop another one and his answer basically was that EOS was it, that anything else he wanted to do could be done on EOS.
So what does he want to do?
Many on STEEM fear that EOS is going to destroy STEEM. At the same time, there are many that feel EOS could help STEEM. Which one is correct?
The answer is both..potentially.
Part of EOS could be integrated into STEEM if that was the path that was chosen. I have no idea if the development team would consider this or if they even feel it necessary. Perhaps it is not. Integration of some of the EOS features, if they prove to be true, could really help the STEEM blockchain.
Of course, the prevailing thought is that other social media networks could show up on EOS. This makes sense and something I think we can expect. Does this immediately kill STEEM? Not necessarily. STEEM is nearing 1M accounts, hadsan active users base, has a number of functioning applications in operation, and developers creating more each day. This will not suddenly go away. Plus, if those people are making money, they are not instantly going to pick up and move their businesses. Apps such as D.Tube and Zappl spent a lot of time working the bugs out of the code while going through numerous upgrades. Someone starting out is going to have to go through the same process.
Nonetheless, there will be other social media entities created.
I guess the question is will @dan build a social media network on EOS?
This is where things get hazy.
There are rumors of STEEM 2.0 coming out at some time. This is something that @stan was asked by CryptoConnie. His answer was a bit speculative also since he claimed @dan does not reveal his plans in their conversations but that there were some things that did not sit well with @stan. Connecting the dots, I am going to surmise the apple does not fall far from the tree on this one.
Essentially, @stan mentioned the behavior of some whales who have a great deal of power. He basically said that he can't wait to see them get what they have coming to them. You can take that to mean what you want.
In a post on Medium, @dan wrote this....
The community I want to participate in will expel the rent-seeking vote-buyers and reward those who use their elected broadcasting power for the benefit of all community members rather than special interest groups (such as vote-buyers). I have faith that such a community will be far more competitive in a market competition for mindshare than one that elects vote buyers.
https://medium.com/@bytemaster/the-limits-of-crypto-economic-governance-9362b8d1d5aa
Now I will say this article was not about STEEM but, rather, DPOS being a better system than the AI based decision making that Ethereum is implementing. Therefore, I believe this comment pertained more to the witness level of things along with the idea that our real life political systems are structured like this. Hence, this quote might not be referring to what I am writing about here whatsoever. And then, again, it might.
One thing that @dan made clear is that he does not like the power in the hands of a few. EOS is undergoing a year long ICO in an effort to get the tokens in as many hands as possible. STEEM, while it is improving each quarter, still has a consolidation of power. Could this be on @dan's lists of projects after he completes EOS?
I am going to speculate that @dan has no desire to destroy STEEM. Why would he? This is one of his creations. He spent many hours hacking away at his keyboard to develop this. I would imagine the last thing he wants to do is to destroy it. Talk to any artist, they do not want to see their work trashed.
Which brings me to STEEM 2.0.
@stan mentioned something interesting in the interview. He used the word competition and felt that Steemit could use some competition. Now if we are being technical, competing with Steemit simply means building a new interface. Busy.org is already that. However, I do not believe that is what he was referring to.
I would have to go back and watch the video, but I recall @stan using the term "Steemit" when referring to the blockchain. Hence, he is stating that STEEM needs some competition. This would make sense since a new interface does not address the power distribution.
Leaving us to guess what STEEM 2.0 is.
My conclusion is this.
The thought is in @dan's mind to fork the STEEM blockchain. This would allow him to do a couple things. He could integrate that fork with EOS if that is his intention. Also, he could create an airdrop based upon accounts between 100 and 100K SP. The reason for the 100 is to not reward spam accounts and the 100K puts an upper limit. Accounts that have over 100K SP would simply get paid the max. Thus, 600K SP accounts become the same as 100K on the new chain. (Or the number could be 50K, 25K or even 10K)
So what do you think? At present, this is my conclusion based upon some tidbits from @stan and @dan innterviews and their writings.
Am I off base here? What are your thoughts?
I will state again, this is complete speculation on my part so please take it as such.
@stan's interview with CryptoConnie.
https://steemit.com/bitshares/@bluerocktalk/stan-larimer-explains-the-bitcoinlatina-incident
If you found this article informative, please give it an upvote and resteem.
To receive the free basic income tokens you are entitled to and help end world wide poverty, please click the following:
Pictures by Google Images