Okay i was curious because just for example a traditional investing example. Let's say i purchase Apple or Tesla stock or something. Then i wanted to get a loan against my stock. The idea of me getting a loan against my stock would be based on the performance of the companies and the products. So the value would be there. I would be getting a loan based first on it's ability to be of value.

I wouldn't be getting a loan on a crypto based on a crypto based on a crypto getting a loan on a crypto, lol. So that doesn't make alot of sense to me. I understand in idea that etc would exist to take the burden off ethereum. high fees and it's inefficiency and it did make sense when there weren't really any competitors.. Now you have so many contenders running along the same lines i just at this point feel anyone of them could breakout and at the very least absorb some of the ethereum market share but a significant amount. So i kinda feel it's up in the air with those guys. Unless one is doing something beyond the others.. Now i don't know if you're familiar with pulse chain.. but it's suppose to fuflill what eth 2.0 is suppose ot do and give everyone a forked copy of every cryptocurrency on every ethereum fork.. So it's the biggest aidrop in history. Now i understand why even if a person doesn't believe pulse chain will succeed. i understand why everyone will wanna check it out and get the free airdrops of every coin they got and do transactions at like zero fees then speculate it all the way up to like maybe where binance coin is.. that to me i can see them jumping in that especially that most only care about money and not the technology they only pretend like they interested in that, lol

i don't know if i can agree with you on the marketing side and niche market of hive.. my research shows hive is not doing much better than steem did nearly 5 years ago.. if you look at the users and growth rate it's either in the same area or not much bigger. .So i don't know what data they using where they talking about all this progress.. My understanding was hive community really comes from the steem community it's not like a new project that got all these people and the number of users are about the same as it was in 2017.. i don't really call that progress. it's also like not even in the top 100 but steem was in the top 100 years and years ago with more money. So how is that porgress so we don't share the same ideas of progress there.

I do agree with you on splinterlands.. the card trading games do make sense. Magic the gathering and all these types did reach over 100 million users so that does sound promising.. bitcoin myk i can believe will reach billions but that's another conversation. Anyway okay there may be potential there but then i wonder do people really like the game that much or do they like the idea they can make money from the game.. i'm concerned about that because with magic the gathering it's no money in it right? its just they play for love of the game? maybe you can correct me in that. i'm not really a gamer .

I do know that in the gaming world when i was into that stuff many games i did play were based on me not getting money at all so i really liked the game. Here's why i feel that's important. A game like axie infinity really looked like it sucked.. so the only way i could imagine people being into that was just based on the idea mabye they can make some money. The problem though is they all seem to fizzle away and i believe much like defi and nft's the idea to make money is bigger than the quality of the products..

However the problem there then is they don't have any useful intrinsic value besides speculation once again. it's like me asking the question if i'm doing blogs on hive are people reading and writing the blogs because they really enjoy it? like would they still do it if there was no money involved? i think part of the issue with that is statistically when the price goes down community participation and posting does seem to follow.. Is it like me reading my favorite blogs daily without needing to get anything money or incentive.. Maybe i just like how the author writes.. So if it's coming down to that then i can see some promise there.

So i guess then that takes me back to the idea of free transactions are useful because transferring money is useful.. .especially when it's free or nearly free around the world.. remittance is valuable within itself.. but not defi and nfts' in my opinion yet alot of infrastructure has to be established before that stuff can be valuable and sustainable.. that's my opinion on it but at first glance i'd think hive could work. THe problem is though it's kinda been around a really long time.. i mean i'm not sure if that's an indication of it's not going to work or it needs another 5 or 10 years.. So yea that's kinda where i'm at with it.