awesome! This article reminded me of Yma Sumac

thanks you for article , good info

I think this is a good question, I will leave my personal comments here, that don't aim to be a full answer, but rather a form of a discussion on the topic. On one hand, indeed, you can think that if a few large players come and purchase large amount of UOS tokens they might become a corporate group, governing all key decisions on the network. But first, let's look at a more realistic scenario: since the network is based on the open source software, there is a good chance, that a large number of people with average stake amount would come, rather than just a handful of people with a lot of money. Second, large stake holders are not interested in breaking the network or corrupting it, because they have invested their own real capital in it. In this sense, having the Importance being based on say > 50-60% stake plays a role of a natural protecting system against violators and bots. We can, in a sense, say, that users with high stake amount are reliable to the network. Third, users with small amount of stake can acquire it by contributing to the network growth, and they can acquire tokens through financial transfers towards their accounts (because anyone can transfer any amount). In this way, it is quite a natural development, that is beneficial to the network and to the user. A successful user, who say generates a solid value and has a lot of financial connections, can generate his/her own stake capital through these connections (and acquire the reputation and further enhance their network trust). And this can be done using the social tools as well. For example, you can make money even just by being a good content developer, if someone in the network wants to pay you for it. Forth, you can fork the network and create your own, and if a community of such a network as a whole votes to change the stake/social/economic contribution %, they, sure, can do that. Fifth, netwok can always vote without forking. Sixth, if you put a large weight on social connections, people, who are not generating true value can acquire high importance. Overall, I think that a value of stake contribution must be > 60%. I'd probably put it at 75%.

You raise some god points here, the ratio of how importance is determined is a debatable topic. I presume the devs analysed the options thoroughly before coming to the 80/10/10 scenario.

good question, good point

such a lovely music to start my day here

also, I like this concert

@pavelsudokey check this out)

Tragic state of the world. Thanks for the excellent post, very important that people become aware of the tyranny oppressing the planet.

hypocrisy is your calling. u.community=kickico=scam I think it's that simple these scammers worked there too

there are some aspects of technological advancement that bother me, despite that many things are super useful. Like the ethics of robots and AI research...watched a new Terminator trailer last night and thought about how this might change the world in a dangerous way...

Technology is providing us with better and better ways to light a fire.

omg, thanks a lot! This is really sweet, I'm touched.