Steem/Tron Update - Why I Side With Justin Sun

technology. Steam and Steemit have new technologies right at their fingertips to bring to the world. The timing could not be better for getting Justin Sun involved, and I know in his heart what he wants to do is come in, be part of the community, and only do things Welcome back to the channel.

I hope you guys are having a great day. So some people might be disturbed by the title of this video, and, uh, um, I gave it some thought, and I'm the type of person I really don't like to discuss things unless I feel I have a pretty good handle and pretty good details on what's going on. And that wasn't the case with what's been happening with the Steem blockchain. So after, you know, just days of going through what's been happening with Justin Sun's acquisition and all of this chaos for lack of a better word, um, you know, I finally was able to kind of sit down and try to figure out what was happening. And, um, you know, it was kind of just a lot of going back and forth. Nothing seems solid. Nothing seems solid. Or, or, and, and I think that's what was so very important to hear from Ned Scott, who was part of the, the, the acquisition, part of the transference of, of steam it to Justin Soon and this large amount of steak. And finally, uh, I was able to get access here to this video. Ned stated that there was never a contract. And I think after going back and forth listening to this and, and listening to the community last few days, I think it kind of hit me because I have a business background. I've done some very big business deals. I've worked for some of the biggest investment firms in the country, and I know a great deal how contracts work. I've spent several months working in mergers and acquisitions, so I kind of have a pretty good handle on things like this. And so when the contracts start coming up, when I kept hearing about these pre-mine tokens coins, rather. Um, you know, I— the first thing I was trying to figure out obviously was like, who's this contract made with? You know, there's Steam the chain, and then it was Steamit the company. And, and somehow they were going on the narrative of, um, there was a promise made at the start of the mining of the Steam blockchain, and the mining was, uh, basically, uh, based and contingent on some of the promises that were made from Steemit under Ned Scott, I would imagine, and Dan Larimer, the founders, right? And so I went, okay. I, I said, okay, I, I get that there's some type of community verbal agreement, some type of documentation to where these promises were made. And, you know, the value of the project is based a great deal on this. And so when I finally got to see what they were talking about, what the community was saying was that binding agreement to what they felt was a contract, well, a great deal of concerns came up because to me it didn't look like a contract. Uh, you know, just the idea of being able to enter into a contract from a blockchain perspective to an entity or to a group of people or person, uh, was a bit challenging. But I went, okay, let me try to go a little bit further with it. But, uh, ultimately in the end What we get in this video between, uh, with Ned Scott actually answering questions with the community and addressing questions specifically, uh, is we get a, a, a history of the Steam chain, and many questions are answered. And I think all the questions were answered for me, uh, in that, in, in, in this scenario. And one of the biggest questions, I really, the most important question We can kind of just start there and, and pretty much address the entire thing. And that's the pre-mine, right? Those, those pre-mine coins of Steam, who they belong to and who would they rightfully do over to, right? And I can't really go deep into what is the actual uh, uh, uh, you know, the intentions behind whether it be Ned Scott or Justin Soon. Like, I, I— we can all look at the evidence and the information and what we can gather beyond conjecture, beyond opinion, beyond emotion. And that is that these coins were mined on proof of work, and according to Ned Scott, they were mined over several weeks with their own energy, hard work, money put up to market to get people to come into the Steam chain and purchase Steam. And so in that way, there were no pre-mine coins. These coins were the hard work of this entity, of Ned Scott, of Dan Lirm, or whatever the case was. And then under Steemit, they were staked in the Steemit. Now, whatever promises were made or ideas were thrown around what could or would be a good idea for a roadmap in a project. Projects have to sometimes improvise, uh, to— for whatever they believe is the best benefit to that chain, right? To that, to that company, to that product. And The way that is presented from Ned Scott, I, I think it's pretty sound. I think it's pretty sound, uh, how he describes the development of the SteamChain. Obviously we know somebody had to develop it, put the resources into it. And, uh, just because similar to Satoshi with Bitcoin, they were able to kind of be there from the beginning mining these cryptocurrencies, it doesn't negate the fact that they put together all the energy and value that it took to create this blockchain, right? Now, of course, the biggest problem is, or another big issue with all of this, is just how the Steem blockchain works. It doesn't work well. In a way of that it is very comforting or even makes a person feel at ease or secure about putting their funds on a blockchain when it is possible for witnesses to decide, and not a lot, that you should not be able to do a transaction with your, with your own cryptocurrency. Now this is a cryptocurrency Mind you, let's think about that a second when we're throwing around the terms decentralization a great deal in, um, uh, on Steam blockchain, right? Decentralization cannot be the ability to freeze a person's account and cryptocurrency, especially under these circumstances. Right? Especially under the circumstances of an action, what a person could take. Now, I understand that this would be a kind of situation where the person who throws the first, uh, takes the first action, or, or makes the first move, issues the first strike, that it may be too late for a response. But, but that doesn't change the situation at all, right? That the set of circumstances that happened within this agreement between this entity and the person that just assumed was this legally binding thing. And in that way, based on the information from Ned Scott, uh, in the history of Steam, him being the founder of Steam, And the agreement, if we want to even call it that— I just call it like a line on a roadmap that could change, but, uh, maybe some of the community took it to mean something else, or they, they took it to be a very, uh, solid standing agreement. It wasn't that, right? It wasn't that. And, um, if it was that, I, I would have made the assumption that many things could have been done differently to secure that as that, as well as it not being able to be turned over to Justice in the first place. And when Ned Scott did this deal, that should have never been turned over to Justice soon, right? To even put the chain in a position to be in that predicament. The fact that Ned Scott did turn it over is backing up a lot of the idea that there was no contract. Uh, Ned Scott speaks out directly, says there was no quid pro quo, none of those things. There was no back-end deals. It was just that this is the Steemit entity, and with this entity comes this stake. Right now, for me, that's a pretty open and closed case. I, I mean, you know, again, the primary thing would have been the pre-mine tokens. There are no pre-mine tokens according to Ned Scott. Uh, I do believe his story about the energy involved in creating and founding a project like STEAM that There had to be energy and thought and marketing and value going into this thing. And because that was the case, you know, I believe it would stand that this value would belong to Ned Scott and not the Steam Community, right? Um, the unfortunate thing in all of this is that These are two groups that really need each other, right? When I look at Justin Soon, what I see is a person who is good at bringing products to people. He's a businessman, right? He knows how to bring products to people. And when I look at Steam, the community and the technology and the developers, I see it as a, a great technically inclined chain with some great marvels of architecture and design, but I don't see it as having that business edge to bring products to market, to bring products to people. And they have shown they don't know how to do that over the last several years, right? This is a talent that the Steam Chain does not have. This is a talent that Justin Soon has. But the problem is they are both mismatched in a sense, because— and that's why they need each other so bad, because The Steam chain is not very user-friendly. The wallets are not good in my opinion, which is why I don't use them. I'm not much of a gamer, and I think Justin Sun's marketing approach and business approach, if he were involved with the Steam chain in certain ways, I believe he could do a much better job. Of bringing the product of Steam to the people. I have no doubt about that. I think this is where Justin Soon shines. Building great products is where the Steam developers shine, but they don't shine in making this a product that is going to be significantly used by people. And that's why it's important that they work together. Now, is the relationship now salvageable? I have no idea, right? But if it is, I think Justice Soon would be very good for the Steam chain. And that's not me taking sides really. And that's not really what I'm trying to do here. I'm just trying to put out the information as best I can ascertain it as to what works and what does not work, right? And there's a lot of things that haven't worked for Steam. And just as soon walking away from this Steam thing and selling $75 million or 75 million Steam, I'm sorry. Worth of, uh, Steam— 75 million coins, rather, or whatever the amount is. I just don't see how that's going to be helpful to Steam at all, right? Before Justin Soon came along, the Steam chain had many problems, many issues, and it wasn't making a lot of progress. Um, and that's just kind of reality of the situation, and I don't think they were, um, But there's something wrong in cryptocurrency, period, when you can freeze a person's accounts and wallets on a whim in a, in a, in a, in a pre-crime situation. You know, it's kind of funny, uh, it kind of brought the question, the idea of the movie Minority Report. And some of you probably know it comes from an author named Philip K. Dick. For some of you probably know about this story, this that was made a movie and, uh, science fiction. And it's all about people being sentenced for crimes and imprisoned before they commit the crime. Because of some type of precognition program that was being run. So you can kind of see, commit a crime before you commit it. So then it becomes the question of should that be acceptable to, to, uh, try people and sentence people before they even— in any event, that's what happened in the Justice Soon situation. He was, he was held hostage. I, I believe Justice Soon was treated quite rude. Uh, from Justin Sun's position, I, I could imagine he came in doing the deal fairly and properly with his own money. And to have to go through this, I think it's ridiculous. It, it's— this cannot represent decentralization. Anybody who says it does, that is not a type of decentralization that I would Obviously, I wouldn't see that as the pinnacle of decentralization, but it concerns me greatly that that is possible to do that. That is in many ways worse than rolling back the Bitcoin chain, right? You know, a lot of people think Bitcoin is decentralized, but, you know, they can roll back the chain to an earlier history. They could change the ledger, right? They can roll it back. And whenever you could do all those things, when a group of people can do that, it's going to really challenge the idea of decentralization. But when you could do it on a whim, when something hasn't even occurred, um, you know, that's even more disturbing. So what were some solutions that came up, if any? Well, during this video, we were able to get, uh, some suggestions from Ned Scott, from, uh, ideas like the vetoes, right? Where both sides can have a veto where they kind of protect their state because everybody's saying, well, just so we can power down now and he can leave and this and that. But the trust and security from this loose term of decentralization we throw around Means that if Justice Soon powers down, he's now vulnerable to another freeze, right? And why should he trust any, you know, anybody on the chain on the Witness side when they haven't trusted him? And so this veto ability that Ned Scott speaks about, uh, it would kind of present a way for them all sides to protect themselves. And I don't know all the details of the veto, uh, but, you know, I'm sure that these, uh, very smart people can figure it out that some mechanism that would allow them to, uh, you know, stop these witness votes, them from voting in their witnesses to alter the change and what have you, uh, would serve as a type of protection, at least maybe long enough for them to be able to make whatever moves that they need to make. Um, I mean, uh, I think that's kind of where we're at with that. Uh, you know, going forward into the future, I mean, we can have conversations till the cows come home about this, but, um, you know, this is going to kind of play out how it's played out, I think, because, uh, from the beginning I can kind of see that there were some choices that were made erratically. Um, there's a lot of rudeness back and forth, a lot of misunderstanding of the other side and kind of just running with a narrative. And I'm glad Ned Scott, uh, presented some video to shed some light on what's been happening because in the beginning, yeah, we, we did kind of have to guess what was going on, but now we kind of know. Uh, my position with Steam now, I think for a long time now, um, I, I've been quite a bit concerned about Steam, but I've still been there with Steam, but it hasn't been the same. And, um, uh, I, I believe the chain, some of the mechanics of the chain is awesome. But I've, I've seen what's been a very toxic community prior to Just Assume. Uh, there's been many, uh, things going on within the community and some of its latest features that I just don't think have been run proper, that I don't think has, uh, been to the best, uh, uh, uh, benefit of the community. Um, I think very little has changed in that department, and it's quite disappointing. But I just want to say this: if you're interested in Steam and you're worried about some of the things like a lot of unfairness that goes on with Steam, if you're concerned about being treated with dignity and respect on Steam, Let me turn your attention to this. So here on Steam Engine, and I want to turn your attention to a project I'm involved with here, BitcoinMYK. This is a project that does many things, but amongst one of the things we do is we use our cryptocurrency here, our token, uh, here on the Steam blockchain to usher in a more democratic system. This is a system that's based on a model we call the proof of participation model. When you post, you receive in fair value the same amount of tokens. We have elections, uh, everybody's vote cast is the same, right? And we have benefits the Steem blockchain doesn't have because of course, uh, resource-wise, because we're piggybacking off the Steem blockchain, we have more ability to run at a much less cost. So we can afford to absorb a certain amount of what would be, I guess you could say, potential dangers in relation to account-based voting. Approaches like this, we believe, help to lead to the solution. And if you're on Steam and you feel that you're just not being fairly treated, or you don't like the system as it were, this is something you could try on Steam without leaving Steam, right? The DPoS system, delegated proof of stake, there are advantages to that, right? There is some, at least some very little sliver of of democracy there, just a little bit. I guess some is better than nothing, but it is full of issues because it relies on money to make decisions, right? And of course, that's going to always be a problem. That's going to always be a problem to the very spirit of decentralization. And so it's a, it's a hard problem. It's what I call the hard problem. It's two hard problems. One is account-based voting. How do you keep people from gaming it? And the second is in cryptocurrency voting. How do you keep people from gaming that, right? Because voting could turn out to be one of the most significant uses of blockchain technology to be able to stop election fraud. But to be able to do that, we have to fix the hard problem. And that's what we have in cryptocurrency. That's why we have situations where people can come in and buy enough stake to control the blockchain, right? Because of inherent flaws to the system. And it's just one of those things that we haven't figured out yet. But hopefully the BitcoinNYK project is on the way to doing that. You could join now for free, get cryptocurrency from us for free in this experiment. And, um, you know, by building a network, we believe that will be treated with dignity and respect, we believe we can build a valuable product that can decentralize and can address many of the issues that have been such a big issue in the Steam community. But you can join us now today. I'll leave a link in the description. Get some free cryptocurrency, give it a shot, see if this is the type of system you'd like to be a part of on the Steam Chain. But that's all I want to say in this video. If you like content like this, don't forget to like and subscribe. And until next time, take care.