Asset and Technology Based Cryptocurrencies are two totally different animals. When looking at HIVE, this is a currency that fits into the later.
In this video I discuss how this puts Hive in a different category than, say, Bitcoin and how the timeline is much different.
Not all cryptocurrencies are the same.
▶️ 3Speak
I actually disagree on Hive being unlikely to go to $2 based on speculation alone.
A price that high at the current level of development is extremely far from being justified by the fundamentals. However, a speculative top of $2 would seem rather disappointing at the end of the next cryptocurrency market bull cycle.
Also, HIVE is not primarily being bought for utility at this stage. If it were, much more of the coin than 170 million HIVE would be powered up as opposed to the 200 million liquid coins. The price is very much being controlled by the speculators at present.
Your current Rank (38) in the battle Arena of Holybread has granted you an Upvote of 18%
i am also thinking that hive will go to 2$ and it is possible thing. You can expect this by seeing it's last jump ad as well as your analysis is too good. Thanks for providing such information.
Summary:
In this video, Task discusses the concept of technology-based cryptocurrencies using Hive as an example. He differentiates between asset-based cryptocurrencies like Bitcoin, which focus on value transfer, and technology-based cryptocurrencies like Hive, which target specific markets or problems. Task highlights the importance of development, user experience, and incentivization in the growth of technology-based cryptocurrencies. He emphasizes that Hive's value is driven by its utility and network growth, not just speculation. Task also addresses the comparison between Bitcoin and Hive, emphasizing that they serve different purposes and cannot be directly compared. He concludes by underlining the potential of Hive's development and use cases for future growth, albeit acknowledging that significant adoption may take time.
Detailed Article:
Task delves into the distinction between asset-based and technology-based cryptocurrencies, using Bitcoin and Hive as prime examples of each category. Bitcoin, being an asset-based cryptocurrency, primarily focuses on transferring value from one point to another, with little changes in its fundamental operation since inception. Task emphasizes that Bitcoin's development primarily centers on improving its efficiency as a value transfer system rather than expanding its utility.
In contrast, Hive represents a technology-based cryptocurrency that aims to address specific problems and cater to distinct markets. Task elucidates that technology-based cryptocurrencies, including projects like Augur, Ethereum, and EOS, offer more than simple value transfer. They target diverse areas such as prediction markets, social media, and virtual computing, with the goal of enhancing user experience and providing unique incentives.
Task underscores that Hive's success is contingent on continuous development to attract users and improve the platform's user experience. He illustrates the importance of incentives tailored to specific purposes, such as predictions markets, social media, and gaming. Task notes that the value proposition of technology-based cryptocurrencies is different from traditional web 2.0 applications, offering added value and rewards to users.
Furthermore, Task differentiates between the speculative nature of asset-based cryptocurrencies, like Bitcoin, and the utility-driven approach of technology-based cryptocurrencies, like Hive. He stresses that Hive's utility extends beyond mere speculation, offering resource credits through activities like powering up, voting influence, and token delegation. Task highlights the significance of resource credits in the Hive ecosystem and their pivotal role in user engagement and platform development.
Lastly, Task addresses the comparison between Hive and other cryptocurrencies like Bitcoin, BCH, or Litecoin, affirming that each serves distinct purposes and possesses differing utilities. He reiterates that Hive's value lies in its utility and development trajectory, rather than pure speculation. Task concludes by emphasizing the long-term potential of Hive, anticipating gradual growth through continued development, user adoption, and network expansion over time.