From someone on the outside looking in. No, the amount of money flowing out of the DHF and what is being shown is far from where it should be.
I catch hell for speaking up about it all the time from mutes to downvotes in the past but I just can't bring myself to suck up just to get some votes lol.
If we look at the current proposals right now minus the HBD stabilizer we have a total of 15,440 HBD going out of the DHF each day. Now you could subtract the 10000 for the Value fund as that's a quick burst and that project makes sense to keep up events and going to events. It's a small cost for really getting the word out there. So that put's us at 5,440 HBD per day.
Some of these projects make total sense like...
VSC Network for Smart contracts - We have been yelling we want smart contracts forever now and the core developers now three years later seem no where closer today then they did back then. Maybe I'm wrong but that would be on lack of presenting to the community what you're working on and doing.
Core Development - As core development has to be ongoing.
Keychain - A lot of people use it and there's really not a way for the app to generate revenue for the development work it does.
Ecency and PeakD make sense as they are open source projects but in a way they should start to be developing revenue themselves now instead of constantly feeding off of the DHF. To me the DHF is more of a incubator program where money is provided to build a project but the project needs to become profitable on it's own or generate some profit itself so that the daily HBD ask from the DHF is reduced not always constantly going up.
Now other ones that don't make sense to me for continued funding would be
Actifit - 230 HBD per day
Dbuzz - 792 HBD per day
These two above programs provide little in terms of development work if you ask me. Dbuzz in particular being that the core developers live in another country where development costs are extremely cheap. These platforms need to generate their own revenue streams on their apps.
This is the biggest issue I have with the constant funding of these projects. Little value or way overcast projects that provide little in terms of generating wealth for the blockchain and instead just create exits for people to make content and sell it is the biggest pitch. If that's the case then the Actifit token buzz token need to be how they make their money. Much like LEO is doing with their own token through ads to generate wealth back into their token and into hive instead of it just being an off ramp exit cash grab.
I'm sure I'll catch hell again for opening my mouth but these apps need to start acting more like a business and not as a hobby to siphon off DHF money all the time. But being that this is a decentralized platform people such as myself should be able to express themselves and offer constructive feedback like this without fear of being downvoted etc.
I very much believe in Hive and what it can and could become and is why I voice my opinions and concerns and continue to invest in projects on Hive and the Hive token itself.
It really has given me faith in us government spending. Suddenly $5000 toilet plungers looks reasonable.
You always seem to put a positive twist on everything. :D
I’m a realist.
I would say that every single project in the DHF makes sense to many people in many ways. The question im posing is if the developers receiving funds are putting in work that would justify the funding they are asking.
Maybe the devs on the project that makes most sense to everybody are putting in 1/3 of the commits that should be expected of them.
Someone needs to vet that imo. That someone needs to be of technical nature.
So we either pay them less or they work harder if any of that is the case.
The post itself isnt really looking for opinions about projects. Im trying to see if the devs themselves are putting in the work that would be expected of developers for the pay they receive.
Having someone vet would be good but they would most likely want DHF funding as well and you'd be expecting and trusting this one person to be honest and not taking bribes on the backend. It also starts to really centralize things when you start doing that.
It honestly comes down to those top 50 or 100 people that hold the most hive that vote for these projects. That's about all the push you need to get these projects approved right now. Who's holding them accountable or should they even be held accountable? Are they doing proper vetting? and does it matter since they hold so much hive themselves they have either invested or committed enough to the blockchain already that everyone feels it's warranted.
I'm still going to go back to the DHF shouldn't be constantly tapped into for these 3rd party projects and instead be more of an incubator type platform where the funds get returned to the DHF over time and the application has got to come up with a way to generate revenue themselves which if they really believed in web3 and decentralization that those funds would also go back to their users and creators that use their application.
However a constant tap for core development should be a thing but those core developers I'm going to say need to be a little more vocal about what they are doing. Almost need a project manager with a decentralized voting system for what the community wants the core devs to work on next such as smart contracts.
Hopefully not. I dont think someone would be so nuts to take actual bribes on that. If they would I would be extremely disappointed in this community knowing that someone like that lives among us.
id say that anyone with the knowhow could do it. why would they need to be top 50-100? Any and all of us can raise questions.
Id definitely be up for that.
Unfortunately, when money (especially a lot of money) enters the equation, all bets are off. Even good men are corrupted by money. It's not greed, it's survival. Need to pay for my kids school, wife has cancer and have to pay for healthcare, car is breaking down and can't afford to have it fixed by it is necessary, etc. Corruption has a way of working its way into even the purest hearts.
I strongly AGREE with this... Everything that isn't a core blockchain development should be viewed as an "incubation" (or startup) program/help... After a while, apps should find a way to finance themselves... Also, it's not the same developing the app from zero, and maintaining it when it's created (of course, depends on the app, but still...)
What makes sense is smart contracts not VSC, it's not clear to me that VSC will be able to finish Smart Contracts, is it to you?
I dont have a way to say that they wont be. I trusted the opinions of those that know more than me on that proposal that voted it.
So I believe they already analised the work done and know it will be finished. Who are they? Can you mention them? (Others than the proposal devs, if possible)
People that voted on the proposal that i trust know more than me when it comes to dev work. They either employ many devs or are devs themselves.. Stoodkev, Dan, Lin, Splinterlands, arcange.
Great!
Lucky this will remain on Blockchain so no need to printscreen ;)
We will have smart contracts one day, but not those ones.
Why dont you think that will be it?
Ok. I mean and I think you also hope, functional. Because you can't go outside announcing "look look, we have smart contracts now!!!" and then is something full of bugs and compromising the Blockchain credibility.
Why I don't think will be. Think on the best dev or devs you think Hive have and why they didn't made it and we still not having smart contracts?
I believe except one (blocktrades and team) no one have capacity, know how, skills, to create functional smart contracts. Don't you think that in 6 years or so and 20, 30 devs was time enough to put outside smart contracts if it was easy?
We are moving to web3, if we force web2's funding models onto it how will it differ from it?
IF we persist with crapitalism's methods, can we expect to move on to something that sacrifices fewer babies on the profit alter?
The people using these apps should be paying the freight to keep them running.
In a free world that means donations.
How many people are paying the devs for the use of hivetasks, or hive.vote?
Not even a nickel?
Shame, I say.
Paying for these projects out of the inflation equalizes the tax across the platform.
Clearly the authors are not gonna set beneficiaries to pay their own freight, absent a push to shame them for their leaching.
In return for funding from the dhf, we can demand that the projects care about rewards pool abuse.
Some of the projects mentioned above don't give a damn.
They sell votes by proxies and hide that fact behind rhetoric about it not being a direct exchange.
We forked to escape the leaching that is vote selling, then we turned a blind eye to variations on the theme.
Smdh.
IF users want any of those platforms to persist, they need to finance them either directly from their posts, votes, and/or (heaven forbid!) gifts, or indirectly through the dhf.
Until the playing field levels out some more, funding through the dhf is involuntary taxation for some percentage of the users.
The people using those apps need to step up into their adulting roles and stop leaching off the rest of us, at some point, imo.