"There's no actual reason to host this software out of pocket."
There are far more important and valuable things than money. Free speech is one of them. Absent decentralized communications, people are vulnerable to censorship that prevents them from obtaining safety signals that are necessary for their survival. We are witness to centralized platforms censoring safety signals that have prevented millions of people from knowing that the deceptive propaganda surrounding the plandemic concealed the iatrogenic harm, including death, the jabs caused.
It is not factually correct that failing to provide tokens is failing to provide incentives. A functionally decentralized communications network that enables safety signals to be promulgated is literally existentially valuable, because it can enable survival when biological warfare attacks depending on deception are being executed on centralized platforms that can censor safety signals that reveal deceptive attacks by duplicitous warfighters using iatrogenic agents.
Given the almost certain subjugation of the USG to the WHO that will enable the WHO to determine the content of centralized messaging in order to afflict civilians with additional iatrogenic harm in the future, there is no token that could compensate for the lack of such free speech on such networks. Plenty of people die with phat sacks, but no understanding of the means of their murder, and their hoards of tokens are useless when their communications are censored of safety signals.
In fact, your argument regarding Meta's duplicity about decentralization and tokenization of such a network confirms this fact. Meta will not build a decentralized network enabling safety signals to propagate without being censored because Meta intends to profit from substituting financialization for free speech. It is the relative decentralization of Hive that has allowed some free speech to persist despite the substitution of financial interest for more important values, because some people have preferred more important values over financial interests on Hive.
I believe this saved my life back in early 2020, when @lighteye proved to me that the deceptive propaganda being published in scientific journals was false, despite this not being the most financially rewarding thing he could have published to the blockchain at the time. Hive is faced today with the prospect of AI becoming competent to evade detection and enable users deploying it via sock puppet accounts to maximize their ROI, and this will quickly overwhelm actual human users on Hive, focusing rewards on AI accounts.
Without curation based on non-financial values, Hive will not continue to support human users dependent on more valuable rewards than money, and will quickly become an AI token mining device. I strongly recommend Hive deprecate financialization and promote free speech in order to defund the AI botting threat that is eventuating as we speak.
Thanks!
Freedom of speech is only valuable to society as a whole.
I don't know if you realize that what you're saying is that freedom of speech should be subsidized by the government.
Usually that means taxation, but it could just mean printing money out of thin air with CBDC/crypto.
That's the only other option if we cut out other forms of incentivization like crypto and WEB2 advertising.
The entire basis for economies of scale is that money will be allocated in such a way to create circular velocity and organic growth throughout the entire system. If you eliminate the economic incentives the system will fail. It is known. We've see this over and over again from decades of trial and error with previous open-source movements. You will be hard pressed to show me another model that actually works. Such a model does not exist. Crypto is the only known way to scale open source tech.
As for the AI takeover of this platform... with all due respect, you are making subtle accusations that I honestly don't think you fully understand. If AI takes over content creation because it's "better" than the alternative, then you are heavily implying that allocating rewards was never worth it in the first place. If it was never worth it in the first place then the existence of AI should have no bearing on whether we keep the reward pool or not. This is a completely self-defeating and paradoxical viewpoint. Even in the case of you being right, you're still wrong... for the right reasons. Pretty weird.
I am not bound by the limited scope of "comments" in their current form.
A "comment" on Hive is any declaration that work has been done.
The network can then move to allocate resources to the work that was completed.
Putting "comments" in a social media box is something I can no longer fathom.
There almost certainly will be better ways to provide value to this network in the future.
"Comments" will transcend social media and P2P communications.
I guarantee it.
Within this context AI could be extremely helpful.
If I build a game on Hive using AI no one is going to give a shit that I used AI.
The game will speak for itself and provide the same amount of value to the network either way.
I appreciate your substantive reply. It exceeds my expectations.
However, it reveals I have not well communicated my views, which I will attempt to clarify. I have never stated that Hive should not have tokens. I have said that people on Hive have higher values than money, and that Hive can eliminate botnets, scams, and plagiarism by recognizing those other human values are more valuable and rewarding them more than financial interests. Those harms only exist because fraud seeks money. No one is going to run a botnet for love. Conversely, spam is controlled by appropriate financialization, such as RC's.
I completely refute any rights ascribed to society. Only individuals have rights, and only individuals have any use for free speech. Society has no interests, nor values. A society is nothing more than a given set of individual people, and only individual people have rights or values.
I do advocate eliminating curation rewards, because they substitute financial interests for more relevant values that inform curation. Curation rewards do not promote quality content, as myriad platforms featuring upvotes without financialization reveal, and demonstrably have been shown on Hive to produce undesirable results. Trending has often poorly reflected the interests of the community on Hive due to stake being the metric by which posts are evaluated and posts being profitable to curators.
The occasional application of stake by censors to eliminate users with opinions large stakeholders disapproved of has also retarded our growth. I can supply many statements by those that have ceased using the platform that affirm that is why they don't use Hive. Many more individuals have not ever bothered to post here because of the many examples of censorship.
Substituting financial interests for many more valuable human interests enables human participation to be replaced with devices that disregard other values and thereby outcompete people for financial rewards. I can point to several MMORPGs that needed to eliminate bots because of that very fact. Bots are able to simply harvest financial resources without competing interests. Every MMORPG with an economy has been threatened with being overwhelmed by bots making their economies unusable by people playing the game for other reasons than simply to accumulate wealth. The easier it was to sell in-game resources for fiat, the worse the problem such games had. If people cannot play your game because AI has botted all the economic resources, no one will play your game. AI is a tool, and using tools to make things is fine. Using AI to replace social interactions destroys society.
On the contrary, an almost unlimited range of examples of other economic systems have existed in the past, exist today, and will undoubtedly continue to exist as long as people do. Potlatch economies enabled N. American tribes to thrive for millenia. FOSS exists today, and my computer runs software given to me by people that spent hundreds of man years making it. I am not an economist, but a quick search will avail you of a long list of economies that do not involve money at all, do not involve debt based money, or involve very strange forms of currencies, most of which are irrelevant to Hive. Every ecosystem, for example, can be thought of as an economy of nutrients.
Hive should promote human values such as free speech, affection, aesthetics, and other such strictly human values above money, and I point out some examples of substituting financialization for those things being existentially harmful to the platform, such as bidbots, opinion flagging, and the cause of the creation of Hive itself.
We presently react to spam, scams, and plagiarism by downvoting to counter the over-promotion of financial interest that attracts such mechanisms, and I assure you that botnets have long extracted rewards on Hive, and continue to today. It is because of excessive financialization that Hive suffers these detriments, and has almost been destroyed more than once.
Nothing in Hive's current code guarantees we will survive the technological advance of LLM's. Code is infinitely mutable, and we have the opportunity to fix it before the platform is bereft of human users that botnets flag off the platform, replace consensus witnesses, turn Hive into a convocation of toasters ruled by Dr. Evil, to whom all our base belong.
Hyperbole? Ya, you bet. However, the threat is real if the specifics are unpredictable beyond excessive financialization being the only vector through which such a threat can eventuate. Hive only has value insofar as only people use it. Only people should be able to use it, and any mechanism usurping human social interaction functionally deprecates people to the level of chattel, because toasters cannot rise to possess human rights.