They all had one thing in common. That was they were all free to a certain extent. So if you wanted to use facebook or twitter or instagram. You'd pretty much be able to not only start using it free today. You'd be able to have the same advantages and exposure and voice heard as just about anyone else.
So the problem with decentralized sites most of them. We don't have that same power. That is because there is miner inflation to pay for the servers and electricity and technical development. Whereas mainstream social media that's bypass and offshooted to some type of accredited investor or venture capitalist etc., Then they create ways to pay for this deferred whether that be through advertising or data selling or whatever.
To the mainstream this will always be more appealing than what here feels more like a membership site payment. So freemium services will also outperform paid services. I believe the solution is in how we created bitcoin myk and bbd is to work just like mainstream social media. in other words work free. Now we know we can't have free. However by being a second layer solution it allows us to piggyback not just off one chain like hive but it allows us to piggyback off multiple chains for scaling issues. Through using a gateway and connecting and directing the value. now this can be a great advantage to hive in that not only would we probably prefer to use something like hive because of the transactional system seemingly feeling free although not free. it's just more appealing i believe to the mainstream or can be.
The problem with every hive project is they work like the 1st layer. So if you take a tribe they modeled to try to get buyers and investors from the end user much like what 1st layer has to do to pay for miner inflation. or the operational costs.
what we propose is that's not necessary. 1st layer already takes care of that. 2nd layer should be free and allow for massive onboarding and organization. So a project like bitcoin myk can grow to a billion users because we can just scale out to multiple chains and direct the economic flow to the chains we feel are efficient and more useful to the public.
So our overall idea is that you achieve decentralization by default under metcalfe's law by massive growth and very good distribution which we achieve through ubi or basic income programs. So we don't have to worry about pyramid top up bottom down issues because as we can operate as a free network. We would'nt have that issue. Also remember people like Vitalik and other projects based on what Vitalik says about hive. Will always thwart that hive is not decentralized or secure. So the argument is relative again to metcalfe's law in relation to the connectivity of the nodes and how many nodes. So this is how ethereum and other systems in the crypto space will always downplay hive. They will always argue it can't achieve a clear sense of decentralization for many reasons.. However i would argue something like bitcoin myk would achieve it by the user base and distribution model which makes it almost impossible for the network not to be decentralized on a broader scale. I can get into the technical reasons why on a later time.
The question then would become how can a free network make money? Well the answer is simple. I don't believe it's possible in the universe for massive networks to exist and be worth a value of zero. So that would be an impossiblity. Never in the history of networks has this occured. So then it has the again follow under metcalfe's law that the size of the network is relational to the value of the network. So you can't have one without the other. So what's more likely bitcoin myk reaches a billion users or some dpos project that is a pay to play system reaches a billion users. It's probably a no brainer the free network will reach a billion users before a paid network.
This post has received bbd coins
RE: What keeps me from reinvesting back into HIVE or LEO