You give great words of inspiration but not words of actual development and strategy. This is why I find crypto/blockchain fun but not serious yet. So many projects propose amazing potential, but then when they don't deliver they revert back to their users/community/investors requesting them to "BELIEVE!" and sometimes shame those that don't. This is a representation of Western society actually, it's a broken world but that's another matter.
My point is that business doesn't run like that. CEOs, Marketing, PR can push the "believe mantra" only so much. After a while share holders and the board simply replace them until they acquire players that can deliver results. That's why the corporate world is so dominant and is both celebrated and hated for the win-at-all-costs style of play.
While it's great to revert to feel-good quotes such as "well, Hive is no longer bogged down by steemit.inc" or "our community is the value" (which are both true) 6 months on those two qualities have lost their novelty.
What Hive needs now is to imagine it's future and then set forth a roadmap to achieve that. Start to form a solid branding around that and present it clearly and broadly. That's what will entice investors again and by achieving those milestones on the roadmap, you gain and retain confidence.
HIVE has great potential.
*SMT has ability to spread it like wildfire.
It's a negative to have development so fragmented and developers believing different things. Some say "SMTs will happen after HF25" others say that they will never happen. Some believe basic H-E second layer is good enough while others are simply moving on from Hive.
There's also a bitter rivalry between Leo and Hive when you would think their success would be openly and unanimously celebrated by all. It really should exist as part of the brand of Hive and marketed as:
The system works. LeoFinance sees success. Hive is ready* and waiting for your creativity, projects and communities.
I know you you mean, but Hive is US, there is no CEO or company and I think the reason we stagnate is because only 1-2% of the users really realize what that means. So instead of waiting for people like Dan to do it all, we all gotta push to be a bigger deal than Dan, or support projects that could be as fundamental as 3speak.
In my opinion decentralized is good to rally around.. but when it comes to achieving results you put that in the hands of the most capapble. Which ultimately exists as a small group... of ELITES. The coders here are that collective. With anything really there's always a nucleus which governs, commands, determines.. etc..
Human = MIND over BODY
CELLS = nuclei (organelles) command function.
Solar System - SUN over PLANETS
Galaxies = Expression of matter around Black Hole.
BLACK HOLE = Event horizon determined by central singularity (unknown but slowly understood)
This pattern rules everything really.
There's much more too it but when you are too fragmented you are vulnerable to failure and total extinction. Closed system with a hierarchical structure dominate in business because we exists also ruled by cycles. Quarterly analysis on performance can then be realised easily and weak players, as I said, get replaced. No successful business continues to repeat something that isn't leading them to their goal.
It's already well realised in blockchain that the end result will be a mix of the two. You can't become mainstream when what you offer is.. "here's the code, you build it how you want.." because that is not then what the mainstream are accustomed to or ever will be. Enthusiasts will find that appealing but the rest just pass.
.
Also I don't mean to down play or even denounce community projects and initiatives. I see that you are very passionate and I fully believe that the users can bring value just as much as the core developers.
My point on nuclei strength is on fundamentals like SMTs.
Once that is built I do believe that projects can explode.
Things work more slowly in the decentralized, open source world. Just look at how long it took Linux to get to where it is today, for example, but it was worth it, wasn't it? Crypto is the same. It takes a lot more time and patience than the corporate world, but the product is ultimately infinitely better.
In crypto, the foundation is a real, vibrant community. Look at ADA and DGB for other examples to compare with their direct competition who are struggling due to lack of real community. Both have loyal, enthusiastic, organic, grass roots communities - like HIVE - and in the real world where success is dependent on being widely distributed and decentralized, I'd say that's a huge accomplishment to write home about ... even if it has taken years.
Well I (and many others) see Linux as a fragmented and also the reason why it's behind the other operating systems. That's the trade off really. You provide many options.. and only attract enthusiasts. Keep it locked and under a tight format and you attract the masses which consume it and don't care to know the system.
That's where crypto/blockchain is really.
I agree that the right base is here in blockchian and then agree that the struggle is real. That's why essentially the issues isn't the on-boarding, it's actually producing that which those whitepapers and teams promised. Too many were trying to get to the green in one hit when the trees weren't cleared yet.
2026 - I prophecize greatness for blockchain.
Maybe sooner?? but the world doesn't look like it's in a state of progress currently. It might be that nation states get into a tussle for digital supremacy soon and we go through a type of "digital darkages." Then when we emerge out of it these new decentralised systems likely winners.. as you've made point about before.