This video is jumbled man.
You make the case for government as gatekeeper and then say that the best way to win is to hide and build unnoticed.

When before, mainstream attraction is what everyone agreed is (was) the goal.

Then you rightfully make the point that big tech have really the greatest power over society. Well this technology still depends on them you know. The mantra of "decentralised is censor resistant" is treated as some 'safe space' but it would be interesting to know a detailed report from the likes of @blocktrades or @peakd ...

WHAT AND HOW IS STORED WHERE?

Because recently there was a bug of images not displaying or uploading. Which points to an issue on some (non-chain) server hosting that content (temporarily but an issue). So then if hypothetically this chain becomes significant and government or big tech sees it a threat. Then what type of system is it going to be if all there is is text held as immutable and everything else is broken?

If ultimately this is still pegged to big tech then it's really not disruptive or significant as a competitor.

People don't appreciate my opinion because I'm "pessimistic" but really those are fundamentals that are paramount to the future of this technology. They are issues THAT WILL ARISE and so they are issues that need fixing or at the least serious attention.

They aren't issues NOW because this is just not big enough to be a bother to both gov and bigtech. That's the goal though no? So then logic will ultimate mean there's a storm coming that people here aren't ready for. The entire crypto sphere really.

That is IF..
This tech gains significant market share.

Which, IMO, is a long way away. Anyway at least you, and Dan now agree that there is much building to be done still. When not only a few months ago, you both were claiming "it's finished ready for mainstream." Dan even claiming "Hive is a popping Island."

It's a long road.
Tech is still speculative.
Reality however is definitive.