I been away from steemit for a while. Been having a lot of thoughts, which maybe i'll blog about later. Steemit at 16-19 cents is quite the bargain. It has been going up since a date was set for HF21, but I still think (and I do have a small buy order on the market from faucet money) HF21 will flop. It's Hard to imagine steem being much cheaper and maybe it has hit bottom, but the stin[k] seems more focused on pissing off users, bid bots, and some whales to listen to a few select whales rather than marketing and bring in new users. Gab, parlor, and telegram are becoming more popular while stink decided to cut our earnings, allow whales to zero us, and we live in a echo chamber. So maybe we haven't hit bottom even as irresistible as the prices have been. Certainly stink deserves credit for lowering the operations costs, but I don't think they have any viable plans going forward aside from SMTs. I don't see SMTs mentioned in the last news brief on hf 21 which might have some benefits when used as a security or fundraiser. Even as I look to the steem-engine and the concepts of community, there is only one that I know is backed by something. That is palcoin; where sending a palcoin to minnowsupport with a memo of a steem url will lead to a partial upvote. I've only tested it out once, so i don't fully understand the fine details of how it works beyond that. Communities always existed under a tag; Thus it is the tag that conferred value, not a token by itself. posting under a tag certainly helps offset the time invested into a post; 25 cents for an 8 hour posts still doesn't rise to the $80 worth of effort put into it, but it is better than 2 cents which might measure the true state of steem. Oh, and I think that .25 cents will likely return the user 12.5 cents under hf21.
We're not pulling people in from google, facebook, gab, twitter, etc, etc. And even if we did, most of them probably wouldn't sign up short of someone marketing how great this point err token based quasi social network is. Even if you pull in 1000 views from unique users, only a small percent will actually go though the process of joining-fewer would buy tokens. The first or second time they are zeroed they will likely leave. We need help growing the network. And that help won't come in the form of promoting the merits of a crypto coin that dropped from $8 down to under 20 cents in under 2 years. It has to be based upon value of the platform, and HF21 achieve just the opposite.
Anyways as to topic two.
Many of the decisions based upon road safety are not based upon savings lives, but instead upon making money. Instead of relying so heavily on DUI laws the states could have under the commerce clause required breathalizer tests before starting cars (my apologies if I have the terms wrong). Every so many feet a marker could broadcast what the speed limit is, and regulate cars under the commerce clause not to exceed the broadcasted limit-but we have severe fines and penalties instead.
When it comes to driverless cars, and I mean ones that are purely driverless. They will not be able to see a child that decides to run into the street from behind a car parked parallel to the sidewalk. There will still be liability, but it may be difficult to hold the vehicle owner responsible when the driving is done by AI. Yes a horrible act was committed, but the owner had no men's rea-not even negligence so long as the vehicle was regulated and approved. Liability would go back to the big tech firms, I suspect who will be making decisions about who gets to live and die in a car wreck. oh an endangered bird or a 2 year old girl, who gets to live and die, AI Gods? As driverless cars become more mainstream, even though technology will continue to improve, I suspect that increasingly the cars will rely on signaling/messaging to other cars in the area and make quick agreements to avoid accidents when something atypical occurs. perhaps with multiple view points they can build 3-d models of what they can see and share risk assessment-including kids hiding behind cars and distance. But still it is not full proof. I think that to complete the data, and to reduce the amount of pests who run in front of cars hoping for suits, they will start pushing for the idea that all people will be chipped when born. They may not be able to get adults to be chipped, but they will probably market it as a way to reduce their children dying in an accident by letting cars know the location of the child. Maybe some people will have their pet's chipped as being kids to add some kinks into the system. If it is all stored on a block chain, in a highly populated area a parent might know where their child is at all times. If someone tries to kidnap a kid, then so long as passing vehicles can pick up a signal there isn't much room for hiding. In another words, the implant of the chip would have to be located in a part of the body that can't be amputated or easily removed to avoid amputations and other surgeries. Do you have an ex that threatens to kidnap your [his] children, this chip will let the police know where right your kids are if he ever does that.
I would imagine there would be a lot of PSA encouraging adults to have their kids chipped and all the benefits of it. It won't really be spoken about how the chips will be homing beacons pedos will use, it won't be spoken about how chipped people who express the wrong ideas will be easily identified and punished by state governments. It won't really be spoken about how easy it is for the government to track a chipped person anywhere in the globe. Well most of that is already true for cell phone users. But just imagine if you aren't allowed to leave your phone home when you head out.
Oh, and since your kid is being chipped anyways, a parent might be encouraged to have the chip measure vital functions. To let the parents and the doctors know immediately of any irregularities that should be treated, or to scrap that college savings plan. That when a man goes to college and a woman makes an accusation against him, the state will know where they both were, and if they were engaged in biological processes. Certainly could prevent a lot of false accusations, or at least confirm some activity occurred but not whether it was consented to. Oh yeah, but he and she both should have gone to a lawyer, and pay $175 for a witnessed contract with supporting affidavits for each time they want to have relations. Ok, I am hyperbolizing feminism. Or maybe the chip could establish a statistical biometric basis to distinguish the difference between consent and lack of consent, and false positive/negatives are disregarded.
Even if you don't think such technology would find a place in the USA, it likely will in china where they are developing everything anyways. Our youth no longer wants to be astronauts; they want to be youtube stars. Parents do tend to love their children so much that they would coddle them to death, and that is what has been going of for generations in America now, and the idea in america is everyone influencing everyone in sales with no ability to produce anything. And there is no resistance when the chips come in use. Any organized effort to resist, well the government will know where they are unless they have their chip(s) removed. Even if it is in the middle of no where, as long as their car's anti-collision AI broadcasted their last known location to cell towers or blackboxes, the government knows where the resistance cell is.
As exciting as the future seems, a dystopia is right around the corner. We get to live longer and duller existences, but less ability to live life. If immortality could be achieved by being locked up in a box for a life time, would anyone choose it? Oh, and if they leave you an oculus rift, even fun harmless games like mario bros may be off limits due sjw culture. The existence humanity seems to be headed for is complete civil death. A world wide prison with no cages.