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.
You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
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.