While I edit my (old and new photos) photos on Lightroom Mobile for a posts, recently I have had some trouble uploading them into Peakd where I generally write the posts as a draft on my PC. When I upload, the browser crashes and restarts, so as a workaround, I have been uploading into a discord chat first - but occasionally run into a weird issue.
Apparently, that image was too explicit.
It is funny really, since I get spam messages all day featuring 12 million emojis that apparently they can't detect and filter out, but they deem this too explicit.
Look at the links on her!
Personally, I don't care much for censorship, but this is part of centralized platforms and experiences. While on Hive there is the idea of people can do whatever they want and this holds true from what can be posted in text to the base blockchain, communities themselves are able to choose whether or not they mute people from appearing in their community, even if the same contributor has added to the blockchain. This is important, because in order to tailor second-layer experiences for a target audience, it is important to be able to sort, include and exclude content in order to best cater for that group.
What is cool on Hive for example, is that it is not only possible for anyone to create a community, but it is also possible to create interfaces that look straight into the blockchain, but can have inclusion and exclusion filters, as well as second-layer tokenization models that can be adjusted for the community itself. This means that not only is the content selection tailored for the community, but the rewards mechanisms can be more tightly fit to the users too.
One of the reasons that base layer "rules" create so much friction, is they have to be as wide as possible to allow for the second-layer usecases, otherwise they become too narrow and limiting. But, everyone is going to have their own rules as to how something should or should not work, but unless it is coded in, it is free choice, regardless of opinion.
As you can see - lots of room for disagreements of many kinds, but with the layer capabilities, this isn't a problem and going forward into the future, the applications and experiences will more heavily rely on the ability to develop personalized experiences for their audience. This distinction is vital, as it indicates ownership - there is the ownership of an account, a token and the abilities that it allows, but also of the communities and second layer applications. These are private and businesses, not public property.
An example of this is how Splinterlands operates, which is a company itself that resides on the second layer, but gives access to its assets for community derived ownership secured by the base blockchain. This means that the company has a lot of control over the aspects of the game, but the assets are able to "live" outside of their in-game ecosystem. This gives centralized control, but decentralized freedoms that can be leveraged in many ways, including the development of third-party products and services that compete directly with the core business. This provides additional security to investors, because they have a "walk-away" option, while still having options for their assets.
This is the power of decentralized ownership and what is going to bring a lot of value back to the consumer and investors, because it is going to bring in more accountability for the business models themselves, since they won't be the "only game in town" even thoguh they are the ones who first introduced the assets themselves. This means they have to keep delivering value, or else what they have created can wither away, but what people own can keep growing in strength.
The move from Steem to Hive is a brilliant illustration of how this can happen, where almost an entire community "picked up stakes" and built an entirely new experience at the base layer. Not only this, the second-layer applications like Splinterlands made the move with minimal disruption also, meaning they weren't locked into the blockchain itself and could make the decision that best served their community and therefore, their own value streams. As we can see over the last two years since, the decision was sound and while the development continues on Hive, it has stagnated there.
As I have mentioned many times now, the battle in the world is increasingly going to be highlighted as a fight between centralization and decentralization - control for the few, or power to the many. Despite what may get acknowledged, Hive is not only well positioned to be part of the discussion, but it could be a driving force at the practical level, empowering its participants at all levels to take ownership and responsibility over their personal experience and how it fits into the experiences of everyone else, on and off the chain.
There are so many sides to the conversation already and there is a lot of undefined territory, but I think that as we go forward, it is going to become more apparent why decentralization and value distribution is so important to our wellbeing as a society, community and individuals. But, this isn't power granted us, nor is it power we have to take - it is power we have to create.
It is an opt-in decision to be decentralized.
A passive choice to stay centralized.
Taraz
[ Gen1: Hive ]
