• light
  • dark

Why the EOS 'Steemit killer' Called 'Voice' Could Be A Dangerous Sell Out

    ura soul
    by
    Why the EOS 'Steemit killer' Called 'Voice' Could Be A Dangerous Sell Out

    Ever since @dan parted company from Steemit inc. he has been threatening to create a 'Steemit Killer' App on EOS, his new multi-billion dollar project. He has now announced details of it and it is called 'Voice'. Unfortunately, it looks like it is going to suffer from some of the same weak points as EOS - as compared to Steem - while also possibly solving some of Steem's problems.

    Dan and Block One recently held a fancy launch event for Voice and made some interesting announcements for EOS. I am not inherently against EOS, I think it's an interesting project and look forward to seeing what it achieves. I do, though, have huge reservations about some of the ideology being used by Dan - which seem to me to be totally counter to his original stated objectives that were more anarchy inspired. I will explain.

    I have noticed that since Dan left Steemit inc. and joined Block one, his position on important ideas relating to truth, freedom and liberation have gradually slipped towards a more centralised, corporate, 'traditional' (empire building) mentality and away from actual principles of freedom. He started out by saying 'let's make government irrelevant', was running Steem and promoted it's uncensored, decentralised features and free market mentality. Now, with EOS, he is creating a massively more heavily funded, more centralised (using institutions such as universities, corporations and governments instead of average people) and apparently more controlled network.. apparently compromising the ideology that attracted many to his ideas in the first place.

    I have seen him post a variety of highly questionable Tweets relating to freedom, rights and liberty in the last few months and on at least one occasion he had to explain himself and even backtrack after many people called him out. Has Dan been 'got' by big money interests? Does he just think differently now? Were his principles just not that strong to begin with?

    After many years participating in groups online who support principles of free will, such as veganism and anarchism - I have noticed a recurring thread. There are always people and views within the groups which don't align fully with the underlying principles - for example, there are some in vegan groups who are there for their health and not for the wellbeing of animals, so who don't really support or do much to care for animal welfare - despite that being the main point of veganism. In anarchy groups, there are many subgroups that I don't think really align with true anarchy and for me, anarcho capitalism is one of them. It's a bit like 'anarchy light' to me - in that it seems to want to gloss over the real world details relating to money and violence in ways that really only serves to shift the balance of power a little more in favour of it's supporters without really doing anything to solve ALL of the problems of ALL of the people. I feel Dan is likely caught up in some denials here that are hidden, even to him.

    Voice

    Voice, is Dan's replacement for Steem and on the surface it looks polished, shiny and new. I don't have all of the details yet, but it seems to be similar to Steem - yet different and dare I say it, more corporate and more controlling/limited. The glimpses I have seen of how commenting and rewards will work lead me to think that it will not be as empowering as Steem, though how it will play out in the real world is not 100% clear.

    One of the main concerns that I have and that many people have is that it will require users to go through an ID process, so that each person can only have one account. This is great from the perspective that it will go some way to stopping spam, but it introduces HUGE problems. Steem's great strength lies in it's openness and ability to support free expression and private commerce - which includes anonymity. Forcing people to provide ID means that no-one will be anonymous and all actions can be traced/monitored. Having such a system is a wet dream for the empire builders and authoritarians - who Dan will not likely be able to stop from infringing on your privacy. What is he going to do when a special ops squad smashes down his door and puts a gun to his head? Probably nothing... And your privacy will vanish.

    Steem remains the only socio economic system on the web that provides community and commercial features in one.

    As you can see in one of Dan's recent tweets - he is twisting the nature of freedom in a disturbingly denial based way:

    > What good is freedom of speech if your voice is drowned out by the noise of millions of bots. We need more people willing to stand behind what they say. Allowing those without masks to scare you into a mask empowers them and disempowers you.

    I am all for stopping the bots, but that cannot happen at the expense of true freedom. He is trying to say that your freedom of speech has no value when votes are being sold on Steem and to some extent I agree that that is a problem. I also agree that wearing masks is far from ideal and it is much better for people to stand up and be themselves in the face of evil and tyranny. HOWEVER, the fact remains that for many people around the world - who definitely don't live with the means that Dan has (perhaps in some kind of gated community) - speaking up freely can mean EXECUTION and TORTURE!

    My reply to Dan:

    > As long as there is monopoly on violence and psychos willing to torture and kill those who speak out - anonymity remains vital for free speech.

    I don't really understand how Dan can be so short sighted here - it gives the impression that he is either going down a delusional ego trip route like Steve Jobs / Bill Gates or worse, is actually part of some kind of plot to out dissenters while claiming only to be giving them a voice.

    I would like to give Dan the benefit of the doubt and I would like to think that most of the world will not get caught up in a trap that ends up getting them killed. However, I urge all involved to exercise caution here. If you feel that speaking out freely is not possible on Voice, then support Steem to the max. If you want a chance at a truly decentralised social network, that is very hard to censor - then support Steem to the max. I really don't want to see a kind of Steem/Facebook hybrid that has some of Steem's features but all of Facebook's fuckery.

    In my opinion, stopping bots can be done without KYC / ID checks and in fact, even with KYC checks, there is no real way to stop vote selling as it can just happen in a more manual/covert way than currently on Steem.

    What do you think/feel here?

    Wishing you well,

    Ura Soul