I did put in platform/protocol in the title for that reason but "platform" is a colloquial term used by the public not really going in-depth over the meaning of the word.
Its kind of how the word "theory" is used in the mainstream circles. The colloquial meaning being: "Something that is of low certainty" while in actuality when something is described as a "theory" it is the highest possible level of explanation there is.
In the same way I think "platform" is used.
This review should first start by categorising and ranking the existing social media blockchain protocols (or similar nomenclature) and then include that review into the scores of a separate review specifically for so called social media, web2.5-web3 platforms.
This approach could be expanded and not only cover social media related protocols and platforms. These categories selected could apply to any crypto related project to determine its level of decentralization with minor tweaks. Most of these categories apply universally.
The question is what is the goal, what do you want to show.
Going beyond social media, a decentralization index encompassing all projects could have even wider application.
That is a literal science paper worth a PHD thesis.
Sure stuff! I think u mostly used the word platform when I read it. Referring to hive as a platform is incredibly limiting to hive. Imo, It has significantly damaged its brand over the years.
I think its mostly because the biggest frontends rarely, if ever do anything beyond the features built into Hive. Some examples aside.
But we can start calling it a protocol, i dont think it would be a too big of a shift nor do I think most people would feel any significant shift in their view of things.
When I read this, I took it as applying to Hive.blog rather than Hive the blockchain. I would say that Hive.blog is a platform, on par with Ecency, 3Speak, etc. But the blockchain is definitely a protocol. Maybe the answer is to clarify that your framework is applicable to Hive.blog and not the blockchain, since the blockchain is the primary tool that powers the platform.
Hive has basically all the features the dapps use built into it. Most platforms on other chains dont have half of that. You can compare them all under the umbrella of social media.
If you differentiate platforms and protocols theres basically nothing to compare to Hive. Hive is social media focused but its not a social media protocol. Minds is built on Ethereum, is Ethereum a social media protocol?
No, the social media umbrella in the framework covers anything social media related, be it protocol or platform so you can do comparisons.
Yeah, I get where you're coming from, but I wouldn't necessarily refer to Hive (the blockchain) as a social media protocol. It can be used for other things. For instance, DeFi applications, and gaming. It's just that the majority of the dapps built on it are for social media. So, I was speaking to what @sparkerz suggested as differentiating between the two. I don't think it's necessary to do that if you apply this framework to Hive.blog rather than Hive the blockchain. The blockchain consists of the set of tools that make Hive.blog what it is. Therefore, you're really judging the blockchain but you're applying it to the social media layer of the blockchain rather than the underlying technology itself.
Its refering to Hive as a social media protocol in the sense that it is significantly social media related under the categories described. Nothing is actually just a "social media protocol". But does it have enough features to be looked at under the umbrella of social media, that it does.
Almost all these categories are a function of the protocol and not of any Hive related frontend which is basically a website. But some platforms outside Hive attempt to claim that these things are a function of their platform. So addressing it all under the umbrella of social media can be done.
But I do think @starkerz made a good point in referring to Hive as a platform vs. a protocol. Which one are you judging? Hive.blog is a platform whereas the blockchain is a protocol. Is it fair to judge the protocol against other platforms that don't have their own protocols? Pitting Hive, the protocol, against Minds the platform is apples to oranges. Why not judge it against Ethereum, which is the protocol. So, what we're pointing out here is the inconsistency. Either judge protocols vs. protocols or platforms vs. platforms. That seems to me to be a fairer comparison.
I hope you understand the nuance.
I think it’s critical not to call hive a platform. Peakd and 3speak are platforms
Its a remnant of the steemit/steem days. It got embedded into the psyche of the community. Should be changed I agree.