I don't know why, but I like puns, plays on words and double-entendres, and I put many of them into my posts, as well as in the titles. The inspiration for this piece came while writing the one last night on the history and condition of the mine and I was thinking how interesting it all is to me - and perhaps to some others.
Over the years I have heard often enough that the "Code is Law" and whatever it allows is fair game. What is interesting is that some of the people who have fought for this view, are against it when the laws change and the game no longer works in their favor. We have seen this through multiple instances with bidbots, selfvoting, downvoting, circle-voting, curation and all kinds of other things.
The idea is what I like to call the EA Sports approach:
If it's in the game, it's in the game.
As said, people are happy when it works in their favor, but upset when the game changes as they may have to adjust their behavior and may not benefit as much from their activities, which they will often count as a loss. We have seen this in the self-voting/ circle-voting behaviors that was met with downvoting behavior once the EIP was introduced. Those who benefited from keeping their voting circle to themselves, could no longer do so. While some changed and decided that 50% for the curation was enough, others retaliated because they could no longer take 100%. This retaliation continues.
However, as @smooth summed up the other day in a comment - Code is indeed law as the processes are going to do exactly what the code tells them to do. This means that at any one point, everyone on the blockchain is subject to the same set of rules, but their behavior might not be well-suited to the conditions. This is no different to any conditions anywhere, as some people will benefit, some will not - in the same way that someone with a mullet hairstyle in 1985 might have been considered trendy, but not anymore.
But, codes change.
When the Steem blockchain code changes, what was profitable yesterday might not be today, what was considered acceptable yesterday might not be today, what was frowned upon yesterday might not be today. This means that there is a type of evolutionary effect on the user base that goes through changes, as we either adapt to the new ways, or not.
Some people will welcome the new changes as it will better suit their personality and processes, some will lament them as it hinders what they were successfully doing before. This evolution of the code generates behavioral change and hopefully, we are dynamically heading toward a better behavioral community equilibrium that benefits most to all participants.
A successful culture of decentralized community interaction.
What I find interesting about this process is that for perhaps the first time in history, the process of cultural evolution is being tracked with a high degree of granularity and resolution, so that we can follow the pathways. Someone mentioned in my post about the stake that I wasn't here for what happened, and that is true, but I can see what happened in the code. this is cool.
While the code is law at the time, what this also means is that looking back we can have a much better understanding of what was going on at that time referenced by the code at the time itself. As we go forward, this hindsight gives us a lot of insight into the way we as groups and individuals act and react to changes in the code, the overarching blanket conditions that affect all accounts equally.
This means that as far forward as we go, we are able to look back and have an understanding of our history, something that I think is quite unique, even in the blockchain world. While we can track every transaction of Bitcoin for instance, we have very little verifiable visibility on what was actually happening in the Bitcoin world at any particular time.
On Steem however, we are able to see what was going on through our own decentralized eyes and how individuals and groups reacted to various changes in the conditions. Through these reaction trends we may even be able to see into the intentions behind behavior or, discover a potential incentive to improve the functioning of the Steem mechanisms. Having the history available to us provides a pool of verified knowledge that can be leveraged to improve the evolutionary path - the next change in the code.
Accumulated knowledge or beliefs held by a group about a subject, especially when passed from generation to generation by oral tradition.
Knowledge or beliefs passed through generations by oral traditions. Currently, the Steem blockchain only records text, so that satisfies the oral traditions part. And we definitely have Steem-generations that we could identify based on when they entered the blockchain - and when they exited.
For example, we might look at the miners as the first generation, the early adopters as the second, pre HF19 under the N2 curve as the third, post HF19 as the 4th, the 2017/18 bullrunners, the bidbot maximizers and then the long bears.
Each of these groups came in under a general set of rules and all of them have experienced changing codes. Some have adapted well under changing conditions, some not. But as someone smarter than me once stated,
“The measure of intelligence is the ability to change.”
The accumulated knowledge of the Steem blockchain is able to trace how various people and groups adapted to the changes on an evolving platform, in an immature and growing industry. Some have adapted very well, some are fighting change at each step and many have gone extinct. How much this hints at intelligence is up for debate, but this does have a proof-of-brain indication intertwined into the outcomes, as no one has to physically change for Steem, it is mental and emotional change.
While this view of the Steem blockchain might not be interesting to those only looking for financial gain, the community and the economics are highly correlated here by design. To really see the financial potential it holds is to understand that the value of the Steem blockchain is the community itself. Trying to tease them apart and treat each aspect individually is to lower the potential of both.
This means that the ecosystem of Steem is much more complex than that of for example Bitcoin, as while Bitcoin can avoid all of the social aspects and act much more like a tradition stock, Steem can't. It is also much more complex than the social aspects of Facebook or Twitter for the reverse reason, as they can avoid the financial economics at the frontend layer as they do not let average users earn on platform from their own content.
While messy, this blending of social interaction and economics is ahead of the societal curve - ahead of the game. What that means is having the ability to adapt on Steem means to be on a platform ahead of the global game, pushing the boundaries of the code.
Being on Steem is more than being an early adopter, it is being a trailblazer.
All of the changes, all of the reactions, interactions social flareups, burnouts and flameouts are all in the history of the Steem blockchain. As are the application launches, the acts of charity, the sharing of life milestones, the wins and losses, the triumphs and fails.
While the code is law, the lore is made by us.
[ a Steem original ]