I don't know about you, but I know about me. I've collected a lot of rubbish. I mean my crypto wallets. The number of randomly perforated coins that were considered the value of something is many. But not for sale now. So I just thought that one day some fool would pump up their scolding and I could sell it for something later. Perhaps none of them will actually do anything.
We have often covered in the past. Most crypto projects are going to fail. Because their idea isn't necessarily bad, it's just that most ideas are nothing more than bullshit, a promise not to make a full promise, and speculation about the other.
Once upon a time (2017/18), all my holdings had significant amounts of valuables and now the value of the blockchain written on them is not theirs. Since they are blockchains just as worthless. Thousands and thousands of projects. But what have they done in the last three years, what is still improving?
I’m sure people would argue that “this kind of project” is doing it or doing it. But how much was the advertising capacity of the past. How many incumbents, holders and speculators actually focus on project development and what is happening within the team?
I think that’s a part of what I bought and held the Statim and now the Hive. Because I at least feel like I’m only a part of the development process, even at the surface user level. Although many people do not like the exact content, the structure of interest of the community means those who have invested but are not necessarily interested. They hear about what's going on throughout the Hive project, new applications, new tools, new rules, and so on. The kind of information that the average investor in Crypto is not going to actively look for.
Not only that, each user has the opportunity to use and interact with the project in multiple ways and at the level they choose. This is something quite unique in the crypto industry for the most part. The only real users are the developers and those who only use the application. Not that they still have a lot of users.
However, the hive provides a wider range of intermediate level interaction points. Which users are not Davis, but still interested in development allows them to get involved in a variety of ways. Of course, there are mechanics like the HIVE Development Fund that users can be a part of. But there are also social strata, discussions and initiatives that come through the community and distribute information both ways. If Davis is listening, they can look for lots of information to drive for development. If the listeners are listening, they can learn how to increase their interaction and the potential for their investment in the project.
Although it makes waterlogging differently across different groups because social and personal opinions are more effective. It creates a place for users, "all the people in the world and everything to do" crypto melting pot. Which is a kind of project coming together although the voices of most people in the space may not be equal due to sharing and recognition. But I am constantly amazed at how many people's voices are considered and see it as a good thing overall. Although it does not slow down the processes.
This is one of the limitations so far with the offer system, which is going to get support from those who are already familiar with the community and can already get the support of stock investors. If a newcomer or group comes and offers. But just as it is unknown to them to support the right to vote, it can be very difficult for them to understand.
You know this quote, if you want to move fast, go alone and focus is basically what it is. Going alone - but it pulls everyone else along. Decentralization is likely to carry this group much further. But it will take time to find many legs, community legs. The challenge is that those who now speak and claim will discover ways to integrate their discourse and effectively centralize the community, through partnership and recognition.
What I expect is that in the future, at least, the development fund will be used to encourage a wide selection of developers to create for end users. The people of that community will actually value it. Investor value should be driven indirectly through the end user, not the primary focus of development.
Do what people want to use and investors will benefit.
At least it has proven itself in the long run and in the past time and time again. Unicorn companies are relatively easy to create through Hyper. The distance is harder to maintain. There is a similarity behind all those who have survived the turmoil. A community is eager to support them. Priced Setulators do not support projects. End users do. People who would buy an iPhone, keep googling, keep installing Windows, buy a Toyota, a Big Mac and a Coke.
They don’t buy these things because they want to increase the value of the company. They buy them because, for one reason or another, they enjoy use, functionality, convenience or taste. A few of these organizations have so successfully incorporated themselves into this community. That use or purchase is automated, created without thinking - part of the social vocabulary.
Investors in these types of companies have done very well. The challenge is to look at the beginning of a project that will attract end users and repeat them indefinitely. It comes through development and marketing for end users, not investors.
This happens even more when end users become investors.
Thank you for reading my blog
