I know many hive users that have never even used bitcoin before they earned Hive for the first time, not many cryptos, if any can say that.
I am one of these people and this is a super important point that many miss - Hive has already bridged the gap to the mainstream, it just needs to be networked outward.
How about a way for investors to “opt out” of curation?
@edicted has been talking about using the "savings" function in the wallet for this. It is a good idea and shouldn't be hard too implement. I and others have talked about staking returns outside of curation, so that a user can stake, get a pretty decent return, but not be able to use that stake to alter community functions. Using the wallet could come with other limitations, for example not being able to use that portion in the wallet to vote proposals or witnesses - - but they can still have the shortened unstaking period (currently 3 day) of the wallet.
Lots of ways to tweak and yeah, I think getting rid of the comment curve might be a good idea - I upvote pretty much all comments I get, but not many do as it is far too expensive in op cost to do so.
As far as the blockchain is concerned, posts and comments are the same thing. Posts are just top-level comments.
The official narrative for the curve's existence is to "fight abuse", but I believe the true use-case is to fuck over small accounts and give more inflation to the top. This actually works out in our favor, because we are not small accounts, but I still don't like it. Bad for decentralization. Bad for rewarding valuable comments and low payout posts.
But you really have to know the point you're arguing. People like Wolf say one thing and do another. You think you're arguing about comment rewards when the unspoken argument is short-term gains for the elite.
This wasn't even supposed to be my point. My point was you can't get rid of the "comment curve". You can only get rid of the curve entirely or not at all. This is because removing the curve for only comments (non-top-level posts) will open the door for users to "exploit" the network again. Meaning there would be no point to keeping it around for top-level posts, given the official narrative or even by sourcing the unofficial one.
I think it's pretty obvious that the curve needs to go because free downvotes are doing a great job of stopping abuse by themselves.
As soon as I read "As far as the blockchain is concerned" I realized what I had said :) Yep - the curve, not the comment curve.
I don't think it is for lining pockets though and I do think it was intended to curb abuse, but perhaps it is enough to have RCs and downvotes.
Yeah I was wondering if I was just babbling on for no reason. Personally I lean more and more toward the idea that there is no such thing as reward pool abuse and anyone should be able to do anything they want for any reason. Free downvotes makes this concept even more valid.
As long as they are used. It might also be easier with 10 million users trying to earn at one time as the large abuse would still be dealt with, but content popularity would act more like it does on other platforms.
!ENGAGE 20
Yes good
ENGAGEtokens.I just thought of something. What about defi curation? People stake to a pool in which curators can access (can get blacklisted if they abuse) and stakers can earn passive income by staking to these curation pools. I need to game theory it more but wanted to put it out there incase I forget the idea.
I'm working on such a project. A curation account as a tokenized asset. People contribute with liquid hive that is powered up. Investors get tokens according to the invested amount. The value of the token is defined by the hive power of the account divided by the number of tokens in circulation. A market maker ensures the liquididty of the token.
The account generates income through curation rewards that is powered up and hence increases the value of each token. Investors can participate in the curation return just by holding the token. No need to power up or down.
Reach out to me this sounds awesome. Maybe I can help
That would be an interesting use case for sure and if planned well, should remove a lot of the potential for abuse that bidbots brought.
In a way current curation system is similar to that. The difference is you are talking about a single curation pool, vs. current model of multiple curation projects where indiduals delegate.
DLease does that in a centralized manner. Of course, delegating requires powering up and locking up one's stake for 13 weeks.
In steem I made a test of Defi curation where I gave a return to users who delegated us in @votovzla, we can say that several people liked the idea.
Those who delegated received a share of our profits or ultimatives from our curations and income from other activities.
We stopped doing this because Hive came along and we are discussing how we can improve the idea or abandon it.
Great idea @theycallmedan! But I think that everyone can become their own curation pool by borrowing hp on https://hive.dlease.io/market and then just have their own curation bot running or sign up to a curation trail on hive.vote that gives a higher APY than the HP loan they took out on dlease.io. On the other hand, the community leaders with tons of followers could also have a delegation pool system kind of like tipu and pay the delegators daily with HIVE tokens and/or other hive-engine tokens.
Also, I wish that hive.vote would actually list and rank all the curation trails by their efficiency and APY. Would help a great deal. This way, whales could power up their Hive tokens and sign up to a trail of their choosing (or several trails and weigh them accordingly) and use their Hive accounts as high APY savings/investment accounts, which they already do I assume. But this whole system needs to become easier to understand and more user friendly for the new and smaller accounts.
That is exactly what @curangel does if I'm not mistaken. You delegate to the account instead of staking to a pool, but same thing.
I like where this post and comments are going. Tweaking and refining how Hive works is very important. This is like a recipe and the only way to get it right is to make these adjustments and then measure the results. If we can rapidly test these variations that would also save us from disagreements and having to do hard forks.
The more we iterate now the more we will differentiate ourselves from other platforms (ehm... like Steem(It)) and that’s a good thing.
I would like to see the price of Hive continue to pull up and away from Steem’s.
These sorts of discussions (community wide) will accelerate this process.
I think that this is the benefit of decentralization and definitely of second layer tokens. Testing can happen simultaneously on many faces and we can get a lot of wide learning fast.
💯 %! For decentralization to work we need to play to our strengths to out pace the competition.
On that note... have you heard of the Telos Blockchain? Apparently the Appics dApp is transitioning away from Steem(It) in what they call the migration. I checked out Telos but for the life of me I can’t understand why they decided to do this... for one it doesn’t hold a candle to the Hive Blockchain and as far as I can tell it’s also heavily centralized.
It’s to bad that Appics didn’t decide to build on the Hive Blockchain... We need people and projects that are willing to try all sorts of different approaches. Hive has huge potential and if we can create more synergy I think it will go far.
Do you know anything about this Appics migration or the Telos Blockchain @tarazkp?
Isn't Telos an EOS copy?
I heard that Appics is making the move and I figure they aren't moving to Hive because of historical reasons - as well as them supporting Steem (initially) after the fork drama because they got a delegation from Stinc.
That explains a lot... And it’s very unfortunate. But if all it takes is a delegation to sway a decision as critical as the migration from Steem(It) to Hive was... then perhaps there really is no point in worrying about the Appics project is there...
It’s all about knowing EXACTLY what you stand for first and foremost. If that vision wasn’t in place initially then there’s not much that can be done.
I did think that the project had a lot going for it though... that, I think, is the unfortunate part.
I think you may be correct. Telos might be associated with the EOS platform. It’s been awhile since I checked on what’s happening over there... There’s just so much happening here on Hive that I haven’t found the need or desire to pop my head up and look around at the competition in the space.
Have you had a chance to get up to speed with EOS?