RE: I am powering down - The extent of Hive censorship finally reached my awareness!
You are viewing a single comment's thread:
I only read a little bit of this but enough to know that you're dead wrong on a lot of these issues.
First and foremost Blurt is not a valid alternative in any sense.
Everyone that heads over to Blurt tends to fit a very particular description.
People who have been downvoted here and are sick of it is the main thing.
They got all their users by harvesting the negative feelings of the hostile takeover or downvotes.
That's not a place that you want to be.
Blurt used a lot of this irrational emotion to justify things like hijacking the entire governance structure in a completely centralized manner. So you don't like downvotes? Blurt has a centralized downvote mechanic in which the owners of that network can simply ban any account from getting rewards. Again, it's like booting up a WEB2 social media account and making the claim that "this is more decentralized than Hive". It's not. There's not even any wiggle room for a debate to take place.
One thing that you are TOTALLY right about is that a lot of these big downvoters pretend like their downvotes are not politically motivated when they obviously are. And that's super obnoxious and frustrating to have to constantly deal with someone who's constantly acting in bad faith and never called out on it from people in their own camp.
The solution to this problem is not powering down and forfeiting all your strength... it's actually the opposite. Unless you believe that Hive is so far gone that we are in 51% attack mode and there's no way to fix the situation and it will only continue to decline... plus there needs to be a valid alternative (which there isn't).
If Hive was truly in a situation as bad as you thought it was a big successful fork would already exist that you could move on to. That fork does not exist. Blurt is garbage but if you want to learn that the hard way that's your business and your journey. My financial advice to you would be to not put any money into Blurt or Hive and just cross post content to both platforms. Going all in on Bitcoin is a valid strategy... and maybe one day you have fuck-you money where you could buy a couple million Hive and start flexing real power here.
The problem with that strategy is that we are at that time in the 4-year cycle in which this is likely the absolute stupidest time to employ it (Hive being at the bottom of the chart in terms of sats). Maybe you have some other moon-bag available that you're comfortable with.
Also it's a bad look to link to articles that use AI to create an echo-chamber argument.
I can just as easily tell AI to debate the other side of the issue.
thanks for the heads up. for now i am protecting my fiat investment after buying in at 15 cents, and moving to icp and gold rather than btc. that is a solid 80% gain or so.
as for blurt i have read that banning if accounts used to be the issue years ago but i shall see what i can find out.
in the end i would prefer learning from all this mess with the dpos chains and making something new, which at this time seems impossible unattainable but who knows.
seeing i miss most of my favorite bloggers from years past i no longer can tell people in ernest that hive is the place to be. and so why would i want to keep investing? DCAing a perpetual downtrend is not a good idea unless i am absolutely passionate about the project in the ling run. and somehow i get the feeling humanity can do better than this.
thanks for sharing your take man, even if you didn't bother to read all of it.
Sounds good although I would def add BTC to a gold/ICP bag.
Super risky not to have BTC in any bag honestly.
The entire institutional world is adopting it right now.
But yeah I'm sure you'll be fine.
hehe, still working on retrieving a forgotten memory from 12 years ago. if you know anything about THAT that would really help me out, lol.
buying btc at 150 dollars back then felt literally as stupid as forgetting the "open sesame" does today ahahaha. guess my life always has to be complicated.
thanks!
Einen guten remote viewer beauftragen und schauen was sich machen lässt
Deswegen tickt allgemein ja gerade die Elite aus. Es gibt eigentlich keine Geheimnisse mehr.
Man kann theoretisch die Epstein Liste remote viewen. Hätte ich die Kohle würde ich auch ein Team darauf ansetzen die Epstein Liste per remote viewing zu veröffentlichen, noch jetzt BEVOR sie allgemein veröffentlicht wird.
Wenn man dann die allgemeine Veröffentlichung irgendwann mal (in 10 Jahren?) Hat, dient dies als bester Beweis in der Realität für den Aether UND seine Möglichkeiten als die wIsSenSchAfT jemals liefern könnte UND WOLLTE.
jo, ich müsste halt bei null starten. mach ich immer so ahahahaha.
danke dir für den tipp!
die reihenfolge ist dann jetzt wie folgt:
klarträumen, psychedelics, remote viewing, hypnose, seelenschreiben, astral projection.
manmanman. wat würde ur-oma nur dazu sagen?
krasse zeiten man ahaha
Hahaah dieser Plan
Hab doch gesagt sollst dir einen suchen der das schon ordentlich kann^^ kannst ja vllt sogar Deal machen dass er nen kleinen Prozentteil deines geborgenen Stakes erhält, bei Erfolg eben
Dann haste auch nicht direkt so große Kosten im voraus für ne ordentliche Aktion^^
Ansonsten schieb auch mal Fliegenpilz Tee noch vorne mit bei deinem Plan mit rein ;)
Glaube Uroma war auch schon Medium bei den okkulten Thule sonst was Gruppen xD
ahahahaha
joa man tut was man kann! ich habe kein problem damit hilfe anzunehmen aber am ende mach ich dinge gerne selber. wenns dann am ende nicht zum ziel führt hab ich zumindest neue skills.
Good Input
~3 dozen whales have controlled the platform (excluding the Founder's stake, which didn't actually exercise governance by witness voting to my knowledge) since it's inception, and still do so today.
This situation hasn't changed appreciably in ~9 years, and I don't expect it to barring the sudden realization that it's bad for their bottom lines, which I am intent on proving presently, should I survive long enough. As you point out the other platforms (including Golos and Whaleshares, I believe) that use this codebase aren't any better regarding this metric. This is the paste squeezed out of the tube, and we either scrub with it, or get another tube.
A 51% attack is when a malicious actor controls 51% of the network or more.
In most contexts it's a situation in which this person is double-spending coin and stealing.
Again, there is a very good reason why "another tube" does not exist.
It's because making another tube is not worth doing.
Because claims of centralization and corruption are in fact wildly exaggerated.
Anyone in the world can become a Hive whale at these prices.
There is no shortage of liquidity especially with futures markets in play.
The bridge remains thoroughly unburned.
But maybe you have a good example of a crypto network that's has a better track record than Hive.
For example: 1% of the Bitcoin wallets own 90% of the supply.
Is this a good target to shoot for?
If you want to claim that Hive is centralized then perhaps you could provide a target in which it is no longer centralized.
Or point to a single other network in this space that's doing a better job.
They circle in their self fulfilling prophecy logic
That's also why they complain about the centralization of stake while only powering down and helping the centralization of stake.
Great.
that does seem to be the case sometimes
very annoying
it is how it is
Or any ideas?
Incentives not clear enough?
Bitcoin appears so straightforward in comparison
But ok, new bitcoiner generation are also not how they used to be
We agree on some things, but our differing goals and understanding create some dichotomy between our positions. Whether the control of a network is malicious or not depends on whether one benefits or not, so that's subjectively determined by users of the networks. Whether one has control or not isn't subjectively determined, and that's all I can actually address.
Several platforms based on the code Hive uses do exist, but none of them are 'better' in terms of the performance of the platforms distributing economic resources to society. All of the platforms that attempt to create egalitarian economies that replace Web2 have failed, or are failing, for various reasons, and that includes Hive.
Sure. Anyone in the world can do anything, which is why everything is done by somebody. But the fundamental proposition of Hive is to prosper creators sharing media, not to create a financial elite that dominates the economy. Web3 isn't advertised to the world as a way for profiteers to become whales, but as a means for everyone to prosper across society by sharing the financial value of social media with everyone that creates it, rather than focusing that financial value on whales as advertising does on Web2.
This reveals that BTC has failed at replacing the legacy financial system with an economy that isn't controlled by banksters. Cryptocurrency that is simply a new way to create elites has completely failed to free society from that financial control.
The imposition of KYC on crypto is the imposition of identical control over crypto banksters have over fiat. However, Hive's use case, unlike BTC, wasn't to break the banks. It was to break advertising by replacing the economic structure that enabled platforms to reap all the financial value of social media by creating a mechanism enabling consumers to financially reward creators directly. The maintenance of the majority of stake by the whales simply replaces the profiteering of Web2 through advertising with extraction of inflation from the rewards pool that DV's prevent from being widely distributed.
This is why Hive is failing, why user retention is abysmal. This is why platforms attempt to implement this proposition without replicating the vectors of control of distribution of rewards, why Blurt doesn't have DV's. But, as you pointed out in a different comment, Blurt instead has enabled the principals to unilaterally manage users and stake via a different mechanism(s), and my interactions with Blurt principals have not produced substantive discussions regarding that, because they devolve into ad hominems, as shown in this thread.
User retention is a reflection of the utility of Hive to the vast majority of people, whom are not retained, because Hive does not deliver a fair distribution of rewards to creators as it proposed to do. Hive replicates the advertising mechanism focusing financial value on a plutocracy via different mechanisms. Plutocracies cannot avoid capture by whales. Whether that is considered a bug or a feature depends on whether you are a whale.
This