Problem: Crypto is hard.
Managing keys is one of the biggest hurdle to using Hive. Imagine if you could just log on with an account from another platform and post, vote and do everything as normal on Hive.
Third Party Authenticated Accounts
All accounts on Hive today are represented by a set of keys that prove ownership with varying levels of authority (owner, posting, active, memo). What if we could create accounts that didn't need cryptographic keys?
The basic idea of a TPA account is to allow accounts from other services to post on Hive. Instead of proving ownership of the Hive account directly, a TPA account is associated with a token proving ownership of an account on another platform which implements OAuth (eg. Twitter, Reddit). A transaction would be considered valid if it was signed by a certain minimum number of the top 20 witnesses, all of which would need to verify using OAuth. Perhaps 11 of 20 would need to vouch (the appropriate number can be debated).
The inspiration for this idea comes from this post on Reddit and this explanation but I don't think we require the exact same implementation, although it would be similar.
It would be up to the witnesses to decide which OAuth implementing third party social networks should be supported.
Possible Issues to think through
TPA accounts would not be as secure as regular accounts. Ideally it should be possible to delink a TPA account from another platform and take ownership with regular crypto keys. There's also the issue of who pays for RC costs of new TPA accounts, someone would likely need to provide a service of delegating RC's to new such accounts, or perhaps the witnesses should provide the RC's for creating TPA accounts. This system might also work better with RC delegation (for both TPA account creation and helping new TPA accounts to post). Spam control would need some thinking through, since it is easy to have unlimited Reddit and Twitter accounts. Whomever provides the RC's would likely also need to do some basic bot checking on the account or they waste their RC's.
We might also want to limit the accounts to posting authority only until they set up keys, in order to mitigate the reduced security.
Bonus
This feature could even be expanded to allow users to transfer Hive to Twitter, Reddit users etc before they have even created an account on Hive.
It sounds very good to me!
I have seen others mention this. steempeak has the option to log in with other services to set up feeds and says 'post and comment (coming soon)'. This does not seem to be an option with peakd. Allowing people to play with Hive before getting involved with keys might encourage more to try it. People can get delegation from @giftgiver, but some of us will delegate to accounts we find who need it. There's a new bot that seeks them out and offers advice. We do not want people to get frustrated when they cannot post.
I have little idea about the complications of implementing this, but I expect some of the developers do. Build it and they will come! (I hope).
Something needs to happen, I feel HIVE stagnating lately. We are literally begging people to come on to get something for their work, and still, they are not interested.
It does bother me that the only reason people will start posting, return to the idle accounts if there is another crypto-surge. Why is it so unattractive?
Seems like a good idea to me. Anything that encourages more users is a positive.
If people can log in for lite accounts easily with the option of creating a full account later even better.
We already have wordpress plug-in, also you can post youtube link directly on dtube, and there're several trying to autopost tweets, but still. Thing is you still need to take care of your wallets in the end. Maybe a hive linked credit card or browser (like brave) will help but not sure.
Looks like a good idea but the issue of hacking of accounts could pose a problem
Another issue is suitability of posts.
Most of the content on Twitter and reddit is just posting links. Github is highly technical a lot of the time.
I mea we could train people pr lower our expectations about what is a post that should be rewarded, but this could complicate things further.
Maybe we should target different platforms?
I think the focus on only rewarding "quality original content" on the platform is misguided. The vast majority of what I interact with on Twitter, Reddit, formerly Facebook before I left, etc. is not 'quality original content'. It's hard to say if I would even have been on those platforms if that was all there was.
I think there is often a conflation between gaming the system (farming) and using it normally but not posting "quality original content" which is constraining and harmful to the user experience.
This is the hard part for me to get around too. It's hard to say if I would be on Hive if people were getting rewarded to just repost stuff they find online. There are plenty of sites where people do that for free. In the case of Hive the idea is to pay users to create, then it can trend elsewhere. It's bad enough when someone else takes the credit, but if they get paid it is much worse.
Perhaps a dual system needs to be implemented to reward both differently?
I don't think this is the idea at all. The idea is to pay people for being participants in the network - attention, not just content, is valuable. The core premise is that users in general deserve to have ownership of the network, not just a specific class of users. Content creators earning while ordinary users receive nothing is already the paradigm on other platforms like YouTube and Medium along with plenty of less successful platforms.
I see curation rewards as those meant for discovering or finding or supporting content. Author rewards are for creating content. It's much too generous to give 50% of rewards to someone simply for posting a link or whatever.
I think improving curation is the way forward, not redefining authorship or content creation.
Curation rewards as designed are more like an active investor perk than a reward for ordinary users. You have to be substantially invested before they are non trivial, and even at a high level of investment it's not necessarily worth your time unless you automate it.
The constraint of "quality original content" is something that comes purely from our culture, it is not part of how author rewards are defined. It's also a mistake IMO because it ensures that both of the main reward channels only work for small sections of our userbase, "content creators" and investors. It's the refusal to acknowledge the value of ordinary users that discourages them from being involved.
"Es la negativa a reconocer el valor de los usuarios comunes lo que los desalienta de involucrarse."
Esta expresión me parece bastante interesante, creo que podría estar de acuerdo con este argumento, solo que no hablo inglés y es limitado lo que puedo entender al usar un traductor. Pero ciertamente existe un potencial en el usuario común que es bueno explorar, saludos @demotruk
I have also thought about this. Onboarding users with other Third-party Authentication is something that can be a great addition to the chain. I would like to see this as a feature in the chain itself instead of having a workaround outside the chain.
Great thoughts. Cheers. 😃
Congratulations @demotruk! You received a personal badge!
You can view your badges on your board And compare to others on the Ranking
Do not miss the last post from @hivebuzz:
Support the HiveBuzz project. Vote for our proposal!