There is a great deal to consider in this post, and I have not come close to adequate consideration of most of it, so will limit my comment here.
I wanted to address DV's, because I think many people misunderstand a DV as the opposite of an upvote, which it is not. No vote at all is the opposite of an upvote. Allow me to explain what I mean by this.
Instead of Hive posts, let's consider some other product, such as Toyotas. We can compare an upvote on a Hive post to buying a Toyota, agreement that the product has value to us that we pay to obtain the product, insofar as our upvotes on Hive support content creation and the creators thereof. However a downvote is not the same as not buying a Toyota, which is comparable to simply not upvoting a post.
A downvote on a post is instead comparable to forcing the price of Toyotas down, reducing the value of Toyotas to the producer of Toyotas. There is nothing available to consumers comparable to DV's in the market for Toyotas or similar, competing products. The closest we can come to DV's on that market are tariffs, fines, or other taxes that reduce the value of their products to producers in a given market jurisdiction. DV's reduce the value of creating content on Hive, which is something totally different than simply not buying a product IRL. DV's are not the opposite of UV's. No vote at all is the opposite of an UV, as not buying a product is the opposite of buying a product IRL. Downvotes are economic warfare against a producer of content, and as such are necessary and useful to prevent spam, scams, and plagiarism, but have no place in political or other discussions.
If we continue to allow Hive to be used to wage war on producers of content for their opinions, we will continue to prevent Hive from creating a functional society or enabling substantive discussion and consideration of meaningful issues.
I might also mention oracles, which were long ago proposed by the possessor of Ned's Hair to do exactly what you propose by differentiating bots from actual people using Hive. Nothing ever came of oracles from the owner of Ned's Hair, and instead Steem got took over by Sun Yuchen and Hive was created as a result, which was a distressing experience for all concerned.
It is not at all a simple matter to differentiate bots from people here or anywhere, and becoming ever less simple or easy the more AI improves daily. I am aware that some Hive users have >10k accounts, but have no idea how many of that massive bloat are actually ever used or pass as human. Generally I can't see any good purpose for such excess, while I can see someone having need of multiple accounts to achieve multiple purposes, I cannot believe anyone could come remotely close to having need or beneficial purposes for even 1k accounts/bots on Hive. Therefore I can only see malicious purposes for such excessive numbers of bots, and there's not a few, particularly of possessors of substantial stake, that have such hordes.
I only mention bots because that's a sticky wicket going forward, and of extreme import to humanity, as well as Hive. I will state that I am adamantly opposed to bots or automating social interactions in any way. Society is people, and bots and machines aren't people and have zero good purpose intruding on social interactions, which are an exclusive attribute of human beings. Such intrusions can only degrade society, and humanity, and the more they can deceive human beings the more they represent an existential threat to humanity of being subjugated via so degrading society that people are rendered comparably valuable to toasters. It is blatantly apparent that psychos are completely willing to murder and enslave people for fun and profit, which society must oppose for it's own survival and that of it's individual members.
I do not take this matter lightly. It's not funny, a joke, just a way to earn an income, or anything short of an existential threat of extinction of all life on Earth, while robot overlords may not yet be able to kill us all, I'm not sure of that, and am damn sure stupid psychos will try to make them that harmful without even realizing they are doing so.
Thanks!
Edit: https://www.theregister.com/2023/10/12/chatbot_defenses_dissolve/?td=rt-3a
Just as AI is a threat to censors, it's a threat of censorship, and an existential threat right now to living people because it can be used to fool them into depending on false beliefs, and it is obvious that can kill people.