Using encryption we could have posts and communities which are private. As a dev I would need to see a businrss plan for this to make it more than something that costs me but returns nothing.
You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
Using encryption we could have posts and communities which are private. As a dev I would need to see a businrss plan for this to make it more than something that costs me but returns nothing.
I don't know if encryption avoids Google indexing. I think it's applicable but in my opinion the priority is to increase onboarding on the blockchain. To increase the numbers, you need to have elitist access, by invitation, or only by registration to HIVE. This would protect content and pages. You could show only a portion of a few lines of the post, and force you to register to continue reading.
That's not how things work. There is no special people club that the Ecency and PeakD is in that allows the posts to be read by their software. If the post is in clear text, it will be readable completely in some other front end. Hive is designed from the beginning to be completely transparent. Everything from your like to your witness votes.
And is it physically impossible to change things as it happens for other online services?
Just as Bitcoin stores transactions on a transparent blockchain, Hive stores posts and comments on a blockchain. One could have private forums within Hive that would be stored on some private backend. In that case it would be a service that leveraged Hive's userbase but nothing else really.
Yes, I didn't intend to upset the technical basis of blockchain. But only to make sure that the visualization of blogs, of communities passed, using the frontends, through a mandatory registration, even for consultation only.It is clear that if you access the register you can publish everything in a way that everyone can read... But at least it would be an attempt to do natural onboarding. More registered users, more votes, more movement of the blockchain, more value for the users themselves.
On a higher level, requiring logins is how Facebook got its large membership. Even when I didn't want to engage in it, I had to login (and thus sign up). Generally speaking requiring logins might be a good idea if you have something some of the non-Hivers really want.
I can conceive API end points could require a login procedure, which would make getting to the data require either they have a HIVE account or they run a fullnode. This is kind of something that would require the agreement of all of those providing public RPC nodes and such a universal change might be hard to sell. The other way as I mentioned earlier for me is to encrypt things for say the "POB" community, and somehow deliver some shared symmetric key to the participants. That just requires one front end to have a premium mode for certain authors on Hive who might think they could get people paying to see an article either earlier than usual or exclusively when paid a certain amount.
You can perhaps give the possibility to the author of the post, to create an access door only for HIVE subscribers. Unsubscribed visitors will see the post obscured (as with NSFW posts). I find it useless that HIVE wants to grow but at the same time allows posts to be publicly visible even to non-members. If membership is a benefit for users because they can vote and earn tokens, but this doesn't happen because HIVE doesn't grow... It means that the incentive is not enough. So why leave our community's posts visible even to non-subscribers? So let's remove the registration and voting of the witnesses, etc.
I think that HIVE must increase its value and to do so it must change its onboarding method. So far, the current method has not been enough. Blocking visibility to non-subscribers can help.