As I hope all of you know, I'm as Hive maximalist as someone can get. I've got so much love for this project, the people involved and those who post here day in and day out. Many of whom I probably don't know yet, at least that was my experience on SteemFest 3. There are so many people, it's crazy.
Anyway, the reason I'm writing this post is that I noticed something interesting. The APR on dlease for STEEM is double of that as one can get on HIVE.
Left: Hive | Right: Steem
What does this mean?
What this means, is that people are willing to pay more STEEM for Steempower, than people are willing to pay HIVE for Hivepower.
Now, the reason is not that STEEM is worth more. (Even though SBD is way above peg and 100% Powerup posts also earn TRX for some additional ~4% APR).
It's primarily that HIVE is punishing self-voting, where a stakeholder would get curation rewards + author rewards, and expects stakeholders to curate and to "donate" to the authors posting on HIVE.
I understand the reasoning and truly believe it's ethically superior to curate honestly to incentivize an active community than self-voting, selling the votes or circle-curating
However, I've also got a very rational side, the side that managed a bid-bot & was pro-vote-selling because the demand was simply there and drove activity on the chain. The side that understands that people are not just taking a risk & locking their money into a currency, to give money to strangers, so the strangers can sell the rewards to buy more Bitcoin.
Obviously, there are many brilliant people on Hive who are authoring amazing posts and keep the rewards or sell part of it to cover invoices, etc. In return, Hive has a thriving & active community.
An economy of supply & demand
However, I can't help but think about the investors who might look at the trending feed and think to themselves: "So that's the content I'm paying a 50% curation tax on? Well, that's a turn-off. I'll just lock my money into liquidity pools."
What would you tell those investors? That their logic is flawed? That they're egoistic & greedy people?
There are people who want to min/max everything and get turned-off when they can't do so or when they're forced to forfeit ~half of potential earnings.
And I believe we should make sure that those are also welcome to Hive.
There has to be a demand & supply economy between stakeholders and authors, where authors have a reason to level up their content if they want stakeholders to give part of their inflation to them.
I think it would be great to have some sort of metric for users that shows how much their value to the network actually is. If they sell and run every time they get some Hive they would have a low score if they power up and help others grow their value increases.
I see some top rewarded authors quickly sell all their Hive, at any price and believe this really isn't sustainable for Hive.
Fostering people to become givers and not just takers would go a long way for the success of Hive.
Posted using Dapplr
That would be a great reputation logic.
The incentives are aligned for them to do that :/
True!
Self voting my once a day actifit post plus being in a circle with slowwalker gave me motivation to buy more steem.
Was hard to keep up on my end of the voting and being able to actually vote on stuff i liked at times, so had to keep buy more! lol.
Also thought i was using my Steem power to be benevolent at times - Figure now if i want to be giving, i shouldn't be trying to use community inflation but rather my own money - made from investments /other.
Not sure where all this goes. Still having fun though hanging around and playing splinterlands :)
We have roughly 4-5 of years of history to show us the economics of this system are broken. If people can show up here without investing anything and earn money, it sounds great in theory, but isn't sustainable unless we have some form of revenue flowing in (like ad revenue), but we don't have any intention of implementing one as far as I have seen?! That means the coin having value is going to come solely from investors and the current economic system doesn't really bode well for investors, which has been evidence by the mostly consistent decline in prices.
Music, books, movies, magazines, newspapers, video games, etc. Does media thrive because of investors; or do investors in media thrive because of consumers?
Only when the role of consumer is ignored, like it has been, for going on five years.
Every other platform that involves collecting consumer money in order to support content in its various forms acts as a middleman, taking a huge percentage. Patreon, Youtube, Twitch, everywhere I look consumers are getting ripped off. They come here; they can leave with more than they started with! How is that not a good deal to investors? These consumers/investors were going to throw that money away and never see it again. They love throwing that money away. So why not tap into that market? Why keep staring at the crypto market? I don't see any marketing directed towards consumers. Youtube comment sections could be full of people saying, "Hey! I'm sick of getting ripped off 30% every time I tip! Could you please move your content over to Hive?" That won't happen though, because they don't know. It's our little secret.
Sure, but if people show up for free and get money for their content, where does that money come from? It has to be backed by something. Since there is no revenue flowing into the coin, it is backed by speculation/investors and that's it. HIVE isn't a store of value like bitcoin as the supply is unlimited. It needs revenue coming in (or a drastic change to the tokenomics) to provide constant and consistent buying of the coin if we want this whole thing to be sustainable.
Yes I'm basically saying consumer money, in. Just like any other business in the world that offers a product like media. Consumers.
Consumers. The same crowd that will be required to support thousands of second layer tokens. Consumers become the investors. Outside of this crypto bubble we all live in exist consumers. They have plenty of money, and are known to spend it. None of this works without them. People will only write into the void for so long. Without an audience of paying consumers, this concept is not sustainable. But this concept works perfectly fine elsewhere and has for centuries.
One option is to take ad revenue which is generate by these consumers and funnel that ad revenue into the coin. Now you have a revenue model and a coin backed by something other than speculation.
One content creator, thousands of views, some of those viewers/followers/consumers/whatever also pay. Tipping model doesn't work. The incentive to hold and tip over time is necessary, or it's new money coming in that goes straight back out the door.
What's truly needed and has always been lacking are content creators gathering support from the outside. Content creators get a lot of support on the outside. Hundreds of millions are exchanging hands annually in this day and age and that will only increase. This platform offers the consumer a better deal, and this platform offers content creators the ability to establish a consistent revenue stream (without the help of current stakeholders) rather than depending on sporadic donations. People also buy subscriptions, platinum memberships, whatever you want to call it. Even that money can go a lot further here. And one of the greatest perks/easiest selling points is how the consumer can have most, some, or maybe even more of their money back if they decide this isn't for them.
You know what happens when a content creator gets 'cancelled' or deplatformed? Not only do they lose their stage, but all those consumers who supported them threw their money away and can no longer enjoy, whatever it is they enjoy. The money was wasted. So here those consumers are also investing in the fact that can't happen to their favorite personalities.
I'm not trying to sell you an idea. I'm just pointing out what's missing, what works, how to sell it.... and I could keep going getting right down to the dirtiest details. I've been repeating myself here for years though. I can guarantee the next big onboarding push will once again fail to attract any dedicated consumers. With so many consumer perks in place though, of course attracting them, their eyes, and their addiction to this platform would be incredibly beneficial if ads were introduced as well. I'm not saying there's only one way. There are also incentives for the investor class. Everyone has a home here, and things can even be better.
Hive needs to make money out of content. Every other website on the web does it, but hive (front ends) think there are smarter then the hole internet economic.
With ads and permanent demand, reward good authors would make a lot of sense.
Also it would be a place to earn as an author long-term rewards, without being the bitch of a big ad seller.
Yep. Use that ad revenue to buy up the coin similar to what LEO is doing. Right now, the money flow is a one way street and that isn't sustainable.
curator votes up ---> authors powers down ----> dump it -----> curator buys.
I TOTALLY agree.
If (trending) authors are not getting more attention for this platform, why should they get paid? The link between increasing value and getting reward on this platform has always been the weakest part of this chain.
Really value, not claimed or conceptual or subjective value.
i didn't really get this can you elaborate?
When you mean getting more attention, you mean from whom? new users for example or something else?
Posted Using LeoFinance Beta
I'm just getting back into hive, well @leo.finance really, and I'm suprised how little engagement "regular" people have here. It feels like a ghostown to me. I thought there would be a more robust community here when I wandered back in. Must be really tough for new members.
Welcome back! The current interfaces aren't really made for conversations tbh. I'd also argue that most people don't really have the need to have their conversations stored an immutable ledger.
I think that this probably is the reason. If SBD is at $3 then a 50/50 post value is doubled:
So it makes sense for people to pay twice as much for the lease.
That said, I'm not opposed to alternative solutions for rewards. One of the good things we're seeing with layer 2 community tokens is the trials of alternative approaches, such as flat curation, with such success that they are now being proposed for the main chain.
I think that's the way forwards for proposed reward changes. Trial them to see their effects. Some of the layer 2 communities are big enough now for a valid trial to take place.
Yes, of course, the amount might also be higher due to SBD rewards being paid out are way above peg. But then it would even be more skewed for people curating on Hive, or am I missing something?
The steem APR has been 25% for months, and reached 22% only two months after we left for hive. SBD is not the reason, since it was at 1$ or even less.
@miniature-tiger
I would guess that the dLease market on Hive is also driven by something close to 100% of vote. People can obtain that by leasing as a group and circular voting. Since this is the most profitable strategy it will drive the market price even if not everyone uses dLease for that purpose.
I think most people won't do it due to the risk of getting downvoted.
You have a good point with everything you say and I'm thinking how things can improve.
But I want to mark a point here:
This is still happening, I come as the vote is still in a circle where a certain group of users constantly receive votes from $ 5 to $ 30 continuously and regardless of the quality of their work.
Which leaves out many users and especially the new ones who come with passion and quality content.
All the points you make in your post are important but this one caught my attention since the "CIRCLE OF VOTES" is not always good.
No one is obliged to support anyone, but I think there must be a balance for everything to develop organically.
It is my opinion.
Those who like photography, upvote photography; those who are into fiction, upvote fiction; those who love cooking, upvote cooking. It's natural. I don't see it as a problem, unless, of course, like @therealwolf said earlier, it is flagrant shit-post abuse.
But I repeat, everyone is free to do what they want. I only give my opinion on what I see.
I will continue working and well with time things will improve.
There was a time when we thought high quality content was a niche we could fill, but I think we're pretty clear now that that ain't gonna happen.
What people want is to get on with their friends, and not have their votes diminished because they're not on the trending page.
You better make sure your friend is not posting any shit-posts! And only 2 posts per day max! 😝
I agree. That's what I understand to be the main reason why we have the downvote, so we've got that covered, if I'm correct. But, other than that, I think the evidence is clear that people want communities, and that the superstar standout post is usually not most people's main goal. I think, in large part, most other successful social media cater to the same: small community engagement. I think upvotes that are equal on a HP percentage weighted basis regardless of whether the vote count is $1.00 or $50.00 would help foster that. Something like what LeoFinance has done.
lol
It's worth noticing that on broken and centralized
Steemyou can lose all your assets at any given moment just like millions $ were already stolen by those bunch of thieves and frauds.I think a big part of this is because it is a massive circle jerk where everyone delegates to upvu and it gives out massive votes.
People like slowwalker making almost $400/day in votes due to this.
Steem power is extremely valuable as there is a shit ton being made by those who are in the circle.
Look at steemit.com trending. It is insane. Now think of the curation rewards being made sniping that bullshit.
If you'd cut out the subjective view of "massive circle jerk", you'd have an economy where tokens have to be staked to get an APR of 25%. Sounds pretty good to me. The only thing that's missing is an actual use-case of the token, which HIVE has with RCs.
They getting a massive 25% because very few people are getting most of the rewards and it is really easy to predict where to put your vote for maximum curation rewards, far in excess of your vote amount.
Sabotaging the integrity of at least three popular front ends so only a few can profit is so worth it though and I'm sure everyone will appreciate it. I miss having chbartist trending five times per day, don't you? And all those plagiarists need a home as well so why not make it the trending page like the good ole days? I mean, 25%! What could possibly go wrong? So what if people think we're a scam like they did last time we tried this. I mean, look how well it worked the last time. The value of the token stayed high and never dropped, even as all the people left and were replaced with reward farmers along with those only here to suck profits out the easy way and run. Totally worked! /end sarcasm
꺼져~!!!
HIVE is not very attractive for investors (at least not yet).
If you hold liquid Hive, you are losing ~8% per year (4x more than USD, 2x more than ETH, BTC has under 2% inflation). If you power up, you will almost certainly miss out on any pump. Author rewards are given away but most of the posts don't bring any value to Hive. Constant sell pressure, and we can't blame Justin or pro-steem whales for dumping their stake anymore.
While tech matters, coins like TRON in the top 20 show that people care much more about hype.
This is the same mentality that first caused many artists, photographers, and general entertainment types to be on the receiving end of massive downvotes day after day, not so long ago. "No value," they cry. "Useless!"
Consumer buying power. Have you ever heard of that? It's basically the driving force that makes arts/entertainment and even information incredibly valuable to both the people creating it and the stage/platform where it resides.
These days you can't even watch a livestream without the host stopping every few minutes to thank consumers for their tips/donations. That money pours in nonstop. Imagine all that pumping into Hive, daily.
Artists were chased away from this platform. So what happened? Now they can earn hundreds and sometimes thousands of dollars NFT style, elsewhere. Consumers purchase ETH instead of HIVE. Thousands, millions worth of ETH. How can that happen if what they do — according to the 'experts' on Hive — is worthless?
What I find humorous about that business model though is the fact: It's new money in the door for ETH, in order to pay an artist, who then wants to convert that ETH into cash. No incentive to hold. ETH breaks even, no steady buying pressure. What comes in goes straight back out. Whereas with Hive's business model, the consumer has an incentive to hold, and so do the creators. So that's new money in the door that sticks around for much longer periods of time, as more new money comes in the door, since consumer buying power is a force to be reckoned with.
You folks focus too much on crypto and crypto investors. So much in fact, you don't even notice the goldmine sitting directly under your noses. When you're offering a product consumers enjoy, consumers become the investors you seek.
@therealwolf's "point"
That's like inviting only hecklers to the comedy show.
NFTs are very small part of ETH economy, millions are nothing compared to 15B locked in DeFi. But I never said anything agains NFTs on Hive. Hive is amazing for NFTs and we have at least 2 successfull NFT platforms being built.
But I'm against using inflation to pay for author/curation rewards. With average CPM of $1, any post making $10 would need to get at least 10,000 views (on frontend with ads that would be used to burh Hive) or attract investors that would invest $10 to make system sustainable.
There is a reason why Steem fell from top 3 coin to 150 and Hive from rank 38 to 170.
ETH is paying only to miners and in my opinion Hive inflation should only pay for witnesses, staking rewards and DAO. Everything else should be moved to 2nd layer apps.
I was talking about chasing what creates views over to other platforms, and now ETH enjoy funds that could have been pumped into HIVE. The inflation or, potential money going out the door, should be countered with money coming in the door. Content is a product and consumers typically purchase or support that product. That consumer money has always been missing on Hive, since day one. Nearly all onboarding has been focused on attracting people with the sales pitch, "Get paid to produce content." Not once has there been a push to attract consumers, who typically outnumber creators by a huge margin. This is why so many publish content to an empty house void of comments.
For a lot of content creators 10000 followers is a small number. Over time, if that creator was focused on creating a business on Hive, it's not impossible to attract 10000 consumers willing to purchase enough stake to equal a vote worth a penny. At today's rates these small numbers pull millions of tokens off the market and lock them away, and the people locking them away are in for the long haul. Many content creators with large outside followings show up and enjoy the luxuries of current stakeholders supporting their work, so that content creator never sees the need to attract their own consumers. Instead they use this platform to collect rewards and ask for donations in other cryptocurrencies, not realizing they could stretch those donations further by encouraging followers to stake Hive instead. Often they have thousands of followers on the outside and no comments under their posts here.
There's far more to this content creation/content consumption world than just advertisements these days.
Who's going to buy Hive when it comes time Hive only supports witnesses, staking rewards, and DAO? That market is already cornered by other crypto projects and Hive seems to be playing catchup, always one step behind, instead of being innovative. Many content creators give several thousand and even millions of people a reason to purchase Hive. Those numbers drop considerably once the content/consumer combination is removed. At that point this turns into just another irrational crypto project waiting to win the whimsical speculator lottery that might or might not ever happen.
We need ad selling. Then content has value and is worth to get rewarded. Otherwise, it has no value to hive.
May be, In my opinion self voting was not that wrong the way it was demonstrated in this platform. But I know there are very serious abusers that created as high as 100 accounts to play the system.
It is no way donation, I am only voting because I liked it. Though I don't like them selling but I respect their decision.
Anyway, I was expecting some idea by you for Hive that I feel missing in this post.
Posted Using LeoFinance Beta
i think the bid bots destroyed the essence of the community. The whole purpose of the reputation collapsed and simply many quality users lost their motivation. Instead, it attracted people that wanna earn money fast, it's not something "bad" as a mindset, they can do whatever they want but we need to think about the future.
The future is to create strong bonds in the community something that is actually happening now a lot. We got a lot of activity in tribes, Hive as i have said before is the mother, and tribes/tokens are her children.
Take leo for example, the community is doing strong, the people behind it are constantly looking for new ways to evolve and develop that's why the success. They got huge potential as a lot of other tribes in my opinion which in the constant future will attract and onboard new users! It became so important that even you for example used the tag ;)
Posted Using LeoFinance Beta
I think the reputation system has been flawed/broken since the beginning. And you don't need bid-bots for that, circle voting is enough.
it sure was but they step up the process extremely fast
Posted Using LeoFinance Beta
I agree. As we move closer to SMTs, especially layer 1, we can afford to begin making the curation aspect of hive less relevant. I hope the transition can be smooth (over 2 or 3 hardforks) not instantly going to "no reward pool".
The key is that SMTs need to be layer 1 for this to happen, because we never know what might happen to layer 2 chains.
Curation rewards help decentralize the network. The people I upvote? They power up Hive more times than not, and they vote on witnesses.
So when you talk about removing PoB and or promoting the use of self-voting and bid bots, talk about how that can centralize the chain also. Curation rewards are the last thing I care about for PoB. - From a large investor.
Steem is a centralized shithole, if you want short term gains and a centralized DPOS, promote bid bots and self votes so the token is barely distributed outside a few hands. My accounts upvote 100's of different people, almost thousands if we are talking on a weekly basis. When we make the voting window longer and flatten the curation rewards inside the window, manual voters will finally, for the first time have an edge over bots, which I for one and very excited to see. I believe with a longer window we will see even more distribution of Hive, thus more decentralization of the governance, the most important thing is decentralization, without it why even use a blockchain to store text, just go to Parler.
Also, we can have liquidity pools on Hive. This isn't something native to ETH and isn't built into the main ETH code, it is a dapp/app built on top of ETH.
Dan, I'm a straight thinker. Bid-bots and self-voting have always been a hacky method for stakeholders to optimize their returns. This can be fixed by giving them an option to opt-out of curation.
Why? We have 4 years worth of data, that shows: giving away stake for free isn't efficient. I know you believe in it, that's fine. You're a visionary, you see the big picture, I respect you for that. But if the value proposition for HIVE tokens is going to be RC credits/governance in the end, it's mostly going to be bigger stakeholders (apps/businesses/investors) buying up the stake. So does it matter how the tokens are going to be mined?
What's so horrible about people needing to buy into HIVE? At least they'd have a good reason to hold onto their stake. Or would you argue that BTC can't be distributed without PoB?
BTC had years at virtually free prices, aka 10k BTC pizza, etc. Many early Bitcoiners, Roger Ver, for example, gave Bitcoin away free in mass. It's how you build a network. It's not the only way, you can have people buy into your token, sure, but there is a reason Bitcoin is one of the most distributed currencies around. For a token that stores wealth, naturally, it'll rise into fewer hands, but it certainly did not start out that way.
I've written a post about opt-out for curation to earn a similar, yet slightly smaller ROI than curators would get. I think there should be a way not to play the game if you don't want. If we had this, people wouldn't care what others did with their stake. When people get staking rewards they usually just sell them on the market anyway, creating selling pressure. With Hive, a lot of people power up the Hive and do not sell, so it actually results in less sell pressure than normal staking does.
This! enjoy coming here reading, being involved. Have issues lately mixing pleasure with investing. thought at one stage i could combine both but hive code currently doesn't align the two for me.
what do you next of my next comment to this?
If i understand this correctly. id set up two accounts. one for investment - keep at 100% and a smaller one to vote, have fun and communicate with.
The power down time - really does affect me also though. Granted, long term investing, but when something has the potential to go from 10c to $1.00 in a matter of weeks - Doesn't seem smart to be all locked up.
no need for 2 accounts. Simply, once your voting power reaches 100% you earn extra interest. When it is below 100% you earn the normal interest that pays out currently.
Example: Curation on avg pays 10-15% lets say. When your voting power reaches 100%, you earn 8-9% interest. That is 10-20%+ lower than the avg curator makes, however you still earn a decent amount and isnt the end of the world if you don't curator for a month or two, or ever. 8% vs 10% is not a deathnail to anyones stake in the form of being diluted.
An idea that just hit me would be, if your VP is sitting at 100% you automatically earn interest (slightly smaller than avg curation would get.) That way, you can vote when you want, if you don't, you earn a bit less but at the cost of not having to do anything. Interest paid this way could be in the form of HP to lock them in. This is also cool because now it's compounding interest, IE powering up HP creates more HP, etc. Just a thought. So instead of "opting out" in some complicated way, you simply don't vote. And if you want to vote, you can but you won't earn that interest again until you are full HP.
Interesting idea. Please do make a post about it.
read my mind
I like this idea. It sounds simple to understand and fair to the different type of stake holders.
Posted using Dapplr
TBH I would love this. I swung the idea by some fence sitting investors when it came to Hive and they liked the idea. Let's see if the community likes the idea, I'll bang on about it.
interesting!
I don't think it matters. What really matters here is the frontends to improve the user experience and and the community's desire to want more users...
Apparently each community now are focused on building their own token, but its not helping hive a lot. For example Leo has now surpassed Hive, because they are focused on one thing. What is the solution in your opinion ? Do we open up to bid bots ?
They have a single token value that is higher than HIVE, but their market cap is 40-50 times smaller.
I do not disagree but the way they have focused and built and discussed has bring in lot of confidence in the project. They are end users, but imagine, we use the same principle to bring in app developers.
I agree. But it's much easier to mainly focus on a web-app & marketing, than trying to bootstrap a whole app ecosystem while fixing scalability issues and other tech-debt issues.
I am powering up like forever as I simply like the aspects of the Hive blockchain and I have a better feeling when my posts get rewarded. Now if the blockchain can do more for content creators that simply focus on that rather than the economics of it, would surely create more value, more users, more buzz and more from everything. We need to enhance the rewards from here in order to keep the users in this space and at the same time onboard new ones.
Posted Using LeoFinance Beta
test
I might need to look into that.. I've got a bunch of SP I don't curate with.. well except for my shameless self voting
Posted Using LeoFinance Beta
Congratulations @therealwolf! You have completed the following achievement on the Hive blockchain and have been rewarded with new badge(s) :
You can view your badges on your board and compare yourself to others in the Ranking
If you no longer want to receive notifications, reply to this comment with the word
STOPDo not miss the last post from @hivebuzz:
LOL @ wolf trying to fuck us all over again.
You're such a good human being. Have a great weekend.
Thanks your highness! You noticed me and I didn't even have to pay you for the privilege of experiencing such an honor!
Good luck with killing the organic experience here once again and I hope you find enough suckers to pad your wallet, since this is your platform and you feel those creating content should have to pay you a toll in order to use it, just like you did last time.
You're such a good human being. Have a nice day!
This is denominated in each currency though, aren't they? Aren't they both losses in bitcoin terms?
Maybe folks realize that delegating for profit is simply vote selling on a wholesale basis.
Some of us were against that and forced a hardfork to end it, if you remember right.
When do we get whive?
That will build some use cases.
I'm told it's pretty simple, but I don't code.
Decentralized whive turned out to be much more difficult than anticipated, but it should be ready in Q1 2021.
Hey ... a bit of topic here ... I dm you on twitter as well for the dCity listing on hivedapps.