And what happened in the Steemit/Sun scenario? We forked and took all his power away. In the grand scheme of things it was a non-event. So yeah it will be a huge deal while it's happening and then everyone will just forget about it because it ended up not mattering that much.
Communities can't be bought out when they can just fork to a new network, and in the case of Steemit our poor distribution was exploited to the maximum to pull it off. Bitcoin has no such distribution flaw.
Even if the acquisition of said token was legitimately bought from the people that held them?
Wouldn't that mean the system is flawed. What stops us from forking anytime we disagree on something?
I mean. You can't fork shit out just because your losing your position. In fact would it not mean also that if there is a concerted effort a corporation hell bent on control could in essence then just plan a said fork them selves prior to a full take over? I think the reason Justin failed in his bid was because he didn't plan a fork himself to begin with.
We can call a win now that we have hive but did we really win since we are the one that left the original turf. We withdrew essentially from a losing battle in the end and we covered the withdrawal by just creating a spin off.
Is that winning? I'm inclined to say with the right price i would sell my stake. Is not much but heck of I'm willing to sell for a price hour much more are others. Image in my head springs into picture the gentrification of slums into high priced areas no longer affordable by the poor bastards that used to live their, becoming homeless due to low of housing.
I know it's becoming a tangent but you see what I mean though right? Again I think I am being too hypothetical.
Nothing stops anyone from forking. That's the entire point. The question becomes: who's going to support that version of the code? Who's going to put their value into that network?
There is a huge overhead cost when trying to create a new network. It's a lot of work and they need a lot of support. The disagreement has to be valid or no one will come into consensus with the new network. Anyone can fork Bitcoin at any time and give themselves all the coins. No one cares; no one will follow that fork.
So then it means of is all gobbled up in the most stable and accepted iteration we basically screw or network by selling our tokens. But if we don't sell them we basically don't benefit from them either. In the case of Bitcoin.
As for hive since it's proof of stake we would lose our say in the current stable iteration. And forking would mean we just sore at losing.
This is doing my head in. Too much what ifs. Great Scott's!?
You're still thinking of these networks as investments.
These are economies and communities.
Eventually we'll be able to work here full time and earn all our income in crypto.
We see projects like LEO and CUB pop up that are fully connected to Hive and just building massive value.
Some of that value gets captured by Hive itself: all these networks are connected.