I don't know if it is broken, but I do know, it is not doing what it is supposed to. A ten cent spread, does not, a stable coin make.
And @arcange, this is not a crack at you, because I know the funds are going to @hbdstabilizer, your name is simply the one on the current proposal. I still love you man 🤗.
But, what I, and probably about 2000 other people aren't loving right now, is the steady decline in the price of HBD. Why is it still going down? As I am writing this, it has dropped below $0.92 USD. To me, that doesn't seem very stable. What exactly does this stabilizer even do? It receives almost 4 times the funding as every other active passing proposal combined!
To the tune of 12,000 HBD a day. Not including the funds from the ten comment threads. In fact, the @hbdstabilizer account has over 350,000 staked HIVE. Why is it staked? Shouldn't it be unstaked entirely and added back to the DHF like the initial proposal said it would do? Questions, questions, don't worry, I'll ask the hard ones.
Here is a quick breakdown from @smooth's original proposal, which some people are voting for its current descendants. You can check my voting history, I've never put my name on it, because I've always felt it was unnecessary to try and manipulate the price of a thing.
However, I can't say it hasn't helped to a small degree, but I think the peg should be handled differently and I will get into that further on in the post. Here's the main four points the stabilizer makes:
- Examine the HBD price.
- If in range, send HBD back to the DHF.
- If price is high, buy HIVE with the HBD, and send to the DHF.
- If price is low, convert HBD to HIVE via 3.5 day internal conversion within the wallet, buy HBD with said HIVE, then send it back to the DHF.
Problem #1
 |  |
|---|
If you are going to try and create a stable coin, you have to have enough gumption to grow the balls to be in every market that it is available, and be the most active buyer/seller of your coin. Or, at least, pay someone to do it. Luckily, (and at the same time, sadly,) the only place to buy or sell HBD outside of the Hive ecosystem, is UpBit.
Problem #2
One would think, after almost 6 years in existence, that such a prominent chain would have itself on other major exchanges like Binance, Coinbase or even Kraken. To me, that is a bit of a problem. Why aren't we listing on major exchanges? Is it because of them being centralized entities? Are we hiding something? Is our pride too great that we won't pay a little fee, like every other major or minor cryptocurrency listed, to get us on there?
Something is off about that, I've been having trouble trying to grasp it since I plugged in to the financial side of this chain. And don't waste your time in the comments if you try to rattle off some bullshit about soft forks and nodes, because other blockchains do it consistently. Why aren't we?
Problem #3
This is the one that really makes no sense whatsoever to me. The 4th clause in the proposal that is supposed to stabilize HBD. How does 'converting' HBD into HIVE, then buying back the HBD with HIVE really do anything at all? Seriously, all you did was sell the HBD slowly for HIVE and then bought it right back. Hang on, I'll give you this paper dollar for 4 quarters and in 3 days, come buy back the quarters from me. The fuck.
You do realize, that the price of HIVE, is ported in from exchanges outside of the Hive ecosystem and is merely reflected in the wallets? Nowhere on Hive, will you find any kind of exchange that helps to dictate the price. Hive-Engine might have a very small impact, but nowhere near the true outer pressure. And, the same goes for HBD. The only reason it is worth just over ninety cents now, is because UpBit says so. Not Hive.
Problem #4
Which brings me to the final problem of the HBD stabilizer (barring the comment thread, which is a whole different beast), the staked HIVE in the account. As part of the proposal, ALL HIVE and HBD is supposed to be sent back to the DHF. So, why is there enough HIVE staked there to easily attack UpBit and correct the price? In fact, there is enough there (because of the low volume - just over $3500) to do it ten times over!
My Concern
What the fuck is the HBD stabilizer even doing other than pillaging the reward pool by 'taking' from real authors or creators with those comments every day? If it was a tighter spread on the price, I wouldn't care one bit and say it was working, but it's not. It's broken.
Beautiful thing about Hive, you can vote on whatever post or comment you want, you can even downvote them if you wish. You don't have to vote for a proposal or you can. You don't have to vote for a specific witness, or you can. At least 'Value Plan' was trying to get Hive in people's line of sight. I just don't see how this proposal really does anything. We should at least have a trusted representative on UpBit doing what needs to be done.
My biggest concern is that the pride (and prejudice?) around here, is what will be the ultimate fall of Hive. How many women witnesses do you see in the top 20? 50? 100??? How many ethnicities? (I don't see a single street cred mutha fukka up there anywhere.)
Culture. It's almost like we're in ancient Egypt and the rest of the cryptoverse is riding hoverboards to El Salvador. So what is the underlying cause? Is it fear? Fear of losing control and a steady income? Greed does that too. Fear of being noticed and actually having hundreds of thousands of real people here, that might not agree with some antiquated ideologies or want to take Hive in a different direction? I mean, considering the history, If I was a 'big investor', I would bet on a different horse.
#rantover. I wouldn't bring any of this to light if I didn't love this place and care about its future. I mean, Hive as a whole. Not somebody's personal ambitions or what one or two large stakeholders have for a vision of this place. Just being me and doing what I do. As such, let me remind you to REMEMBER TO BE YOU! I always am, because someone has to be me.
For more amazing ideas and rants, simply comment below! Though, ideas aren't usually free. Which reminds me, I am still missing my payments for a few of those. Y'all need to square up and pay this piper.
because I can
So Can WE
Vote Witty
Is Voting #WITNESSES difficult?Let me do it for you!
Set Witty as your --->PROXY VOTER!<---
The stabilizer doesn't do outside arbitrage, the internal price is near par.
Magi is gonna have to take us away, we will never moon by paying to be liquid on cex's.
Too many interests lined up against us, imo.
What crypto has mooned without one?
Probably none.
Nor without backing by the irl cabal.
Have we lost the plot?
Death to the banks?
Not sure that's in the whitepaper for Hive, but I like it. 😁 And by no means am I vouching for pure centralization of Hive. What I am leaning towards, is omelets and lemonade.
I think the main reason we won't moon anytime soon is because being a Whale on here is kind of lame right now.
Lots of current users could be whales on HIVE but they don’t want to power up. 🤷♂️
🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣
Make Being a Whale Great Again is my platform. My platform is unique and the mantra was only inspired by my own genius 🤣
There has really never been much of ANY push for this chain to be anything other than the cash cow it is for a select few. The Leo side and a couple games are the only thing bringing outside eyes in. Otherwise it is just this echo chamber of a couple K lost souls banging our heads against the wall of "votes" hoping for one of those select few to ever so graciously give up a tiny bit of the large sums they rake in regularly. This is not new, look at the "witnesses" who tend to be the same exact ones recurrently and have done what? Honestly I'm here still just so my family can see my posts.
I like the diary effect it has, no lie. I'm often showing them my joy in their progress (my family) by putting them out there or on here or whatever. At least here, I know it'll be seen by a few and not ghosted by some stupid algorithm that only wants to show politics or tits. Can't say I don't like one of those though either !LOLZ !PIMP !UNI
The diary aspect is the main use case for this place for anyone who isn't trying to rape and pillage the chain. The lack of algo is about the only saving grace here.
Does make one wonder...I just hope it's not the death knell it appears to be.
!PIMP
No death… cmc hbd price is no diagnosis at all…
Lot of unused funds in that DHF... !PIMP !UNI !WINE
So I upvoted this post not because I agree with you but I think it’s an interesting conversation.
The way HBD is setup, anyone can run their own mini versions. HBD is backed by HIVE which is not a stable cryptocurrency so I would not expect it to stay at $1 consistently.
I’m not sure the amount of hive in smooths wallet means anything. HIVE is so cheap it’s not that much money.
Stabilizer doesnt act on upbit only internally the real price of hbd is comparing how much you sell in here for example here i am selling for 0.093 hive right now in this moment and if i i go to an exchange like binance I will sell hive for usdt by 0.0932 the ratio gives me 0.997 $ … people need to forget about upbit price or coinmarketcap…
I agree with him. These are things I've been saying for years.
I’m not convinced a lot of the “problems” on HIVE are consistent. I’m also not convinced any of our problems are systemic.
It’s possible to change things here if people have a lot of HP and people don’t attack other people’s character.
To me, everything is contextual based on the current market and what people are doing on chain today.
These things are true. However, how stake is wielded is determined by what incentives are given stakeholders. The incentive to accumulate stake to impact governance is both positive and negative, depending on how much you can accumulate. If you can accumulate enough to become a potent factor in a majority stake coalition, you have strong incentive to acquire it because that coalition can manage code to benefit them. If you can't accumulate that much stake, you have a disincentive to maximize your stake because governance will be managed by a coalition of stakeholders that are managing the platform to benefit themselves.
I disagree with this. Incentive structures are good for predicting the average person. They are not good at predicting unique or eccentric people.
This is, of course, true, but financial incentives drive financial decisions, and Hive is a plutocracy that requires only 50.00001% of stake to completely control governance. Generally speaking, folks with the most substantial stake will be those that best attain it, and best manage it, and their decisions when granted unitary control of a financial asset can be counted on to exercise maximal prudence. The first rule of investing is to preserve your capital, and only then to seek to increase it. I observe that Hive management has been exercised to prevent control of governance from being acquired by more capital than extant management can bring to the table by means of presenting the aspect of a poorly performing asset. Being listed only on Upbit, a shrinking user base, and a token declining in value all discourage investment from deep pockets.
They don't prevent unique individuals with significant assets from investing, as you exemplify, but they have to date discouraged investors that could easily buy all the Hive tokens being sold from doing so and seizing control of governance as Sun did Steem. Because the extant Hive management maintain control of governance solely because of their possession of a bare majority of stake there is not another mechanism that can prevent someone or group with more money than they have from taking over governance.
Perhaps there is some other factor I am missing. Can you think of anything else that prevents control of Hive from being purchased by someone or group with deeper pockets than extant management?
I really don’t think people need to discourage deep pockets from investing in HIVE. The genesis of HIVE was mostly because someone bought in without a large stake and without community support.
I think that’s the answer to your question.
The amount I was pointing out was the staked HIVE on the stabilizer account, which is far more than would be needed to truly peg it at a dollar on UpBit. Didn't look at smoothies wallet !LOLZ, just the stabilizer routes.
Well I called it smooth's wallet because of this -
I would need to find the post but I believe smooth has encouraged other people to run their own versions of HBD Stabilizer in the past to try to decentralize HBD Stabilizer.
HBD Stabilizer is funded through the DHF. If we have a particular question, I’m guessing smooth would be receptive and answer the question if the question is concise.
I’m all for accountability but I’m just not sure what the goal is here.
Like do we want that HP out of that account? Do we want HBD to stay at $1 everywhere all the time?
It initially said all HIVE and HBD so technically, it should be returned. As for a dollar everywhere? Is that not what makes a stablecoin?
I looked at the wallet and I am not sure where that HP came from. Is that HP from the DHF or the reward pool?
2nd part -
I was under the impression HBD Stabilizer is just about holding the internal price to peg.
I would think if we want HBD Stabilizer to cover all exchanges that would cost more from DHF.
The nature of HBD, its relationship to HIVE (HIVE debt), and its economy, are very problematic for me, and I very much appreciate you 'ranting' about some of these significantly glaring issues. I don't think that the Hive economy has been managed well at all. 😁🙏💚✨🤙
!ALIVE
!BBH
!PIZZA
!SLOTH
For whom?
Depends what position you are in for the management !LOLZ Wouldn't an easy on/off ramp be widely accepted though? !PIMP !UNI
HBD, as it is meant to be stabel should be integreated in as many ways as it is possible to be paying coin. Both inside and outside of the chain. We dont need to be on stocks (but it could be usefull) but we sure need badly to have many ways to use HBD to pay for real things.
There was a card someone was working on that I heard about on one of @buttcoins' shows, be curious to know what the progress is on that. THAT would be a game changer.
Interesting post! I would seem that DHF money could be better spent getting a listing like Coinbase instead of some of the initiatives we had in the past...
I would be interested in hearing some responses to the questions you raise.
Fingers crossed, eh? It might have to be a solo entity that does it, regardless what any consensus there is for it.
We can’t just throw money at exchanges to get listed. HIVE needs to meet their listing criteria.
HBD has never been stable (nor probably ever will be under the current paradigm). It should be pegged in the code...buy for $1 of HIVE, sell for $1 of HIVE, but nah, we let it float on the market and wonder why it fluctuates wildly. 🤷♂️ Perhaps it should just be done away with entirely...it has very little use other than to hodl for interest and it dilutes the market (the chain isn't really rolling in dough at this point other than what it prints out of thin air).
HBD is probably the only thing keeping HIVE from going to tenths of a dollar 😆 sad, but you're probably right. I think both of them should be listed in far more places, giving us the reach we're missing.
This suggests you know the answer to your question in the OP, regarding why we're not listed more widely. In fact, our history suggests Hive has deliberately been managed to avoid interest from outside investors with substantial non-hive stakes. 'We', the platform, as managed by the majority stakeholder(s) whom maintain the code by maintaining the consensus, don't manage the platform in order to attract the bright light of the Sun, but to benefit the majority of stake in Hive and it's holders. The Sun shining on Hive is the greatest threat to their continued enjoyment of their possession of control of the platform, as Steem demonstrated.
The fix for that is to deprive the majority stakeholders of their control, to introduce another metric for electing witnesses that prevents stake alone from enabling complete control of governance, because that defangs the power of external investors to simply buy complete control of governance. These incentives presently in the code produce the current paradigm of discouragement of bright light on Hive attracting investment, because that is the threat to extant majority stakeholders retaining complete control of the governance of the platform.
This is why the problem can't be fixed. The only solution to the threat the bright light of the Sun seizing unitary control of Hive as it did Steem is to eliminate the present unitary control of Hive possessed by the majority stakeholder(s) of Hive. This leaves Hive skulking in the shadows, where the Sun cannot shine, and that is what current management acts to maintain, because that is what maintains their ability to manage the platform for their benefit.
Interesting notion with the added governance layer. There are a lot of proxies to various accounts - my own even - of people that probably don't have as vetted an interest as you or I. Maybe have HP be worth half of a governing 'vote' (with a minimum of X staked to prove faith in the chain) and then maybe a minimum of X activity(ies) beyond only governance actions, to garner the other half of a vote giving everyone merely two halfs of 1 vote (30). I would even further that and drop it to 15 that people could vote for vs 30. I strongly feel that would shake things up and rearrange the place a bit too.
Residency requirements are entirely reasonable, and every US state used to have them for access to almost all welfare services, hunting and fishing licenses at the price for state residents, and etc. However, that alone might only delay the threat of complete unitary power over the witnesses until an attacker met the requirement. I think some other metric will be necessary to reflect the will of the Demos so that stake alone isn't able to seize unitary control of governance. Adding residency and activity requirements to witness voting can prevent the sudden seizure of governance by a well funded attacker, but wouldn't prevent the eventual seizure of power. As long as Hive remains a pure plutocracy all that is necessary to seize unitary control of governance is more money than 50% of the extant stake.
Some form of oracular verification a user/account is a unique human that votes a Hive stake must sort people and enable individuals to vote their preference - not only the weight of their wallet - is the only idea I can come up with that prevents nothing more than more than 50% of money voting for witnesses from taking - and keeping - totalitarian power over the platform.
Damn !PIMP speak on it!
#whatido
I hope you get some good answers to your questions here.
Sure would be nice, but then again, do we really want those answers?
I say yes. Sometimes the unknown is much worse than the dismal truth.
For me, it's the exchanges, why the hesitation?
Viva hbd
Are you fr??
Ok
An ai search told me listing on binance costs between 300k and a milion...
Exchange “fee” (commercial/marketing arrangements): ~$300K–$1M+
Liquidity + market maker services: ~$50K–$200K+
Legal & audit: ~$20K–$150K+
Token incentives/airdrops: Variable (can be significant)
Total comprehensive budget to successfully list and launch could therefore be over $1 million USD for many projects....
Which the DHF could easily fund to do.
Without significantly changing anything, except for the Rally car racing, and maybe some well-drilling. It is not the lack of funds to gain the listing, but the threat of listing attracting attention and nominal financial depth to wrest control of the platform from it's present management.
What else secures present management than the lack of competition?
You see clearly.
The staked HIVE is powered down at the maximum rate by the bot and then used for trading and returned to DHF.