Playing Devil's Advocate: Why Steem HF23 is NOT THEFT!

in #steem6 days ago

theifcheatscammertheft.png

Our good friend @apshamilton has given use some free legal advice recently suggesting that the actions Justin Sun is partaking in qualify as illegal theft of funds. We are all on the same page here pretty much based on one defining 'fact':

Importantly, HF23, did not actually fork the Steem blockchain into two separate chains, it simply changed the operating code of the existing Steem blockchain.

So because Hive was an 'Airdrop' it is not theft, but because Steem 'changed the code'... it is theft. I hope you guys can see at this point that 'airdrop' and 'changed the code' are exactly the same thing. If we win a court case against Steem for theft, we are setting a dangerous legal precedent that can later be used against us and any other fork that modifies distribution of funds.

The first time I ever spoke in Discord with the Hive community we weren't even Hive yet. It was right before the fork and we were still trying to figure out what to do; not even knowing a fork was in the works.

danielconwayscorchedearthas.jpg

I pitched my plan of 'SCORCHED EARTH".

I wanted to destroy all the stake that was attacking us. I won't say I was laughed out the room because that's not what happened, but essentially my words had zero support from the group I was talking to. I chortled when Hive got created, because pretty much everything I said happened and no one even questioned it.

Crux

Importantly, HF23, did not actually fork the Steem blockchain into two separate chains, it simply changed the operating code of the existing Steem blockchain.

This is inherently false, and the foundation of our flawed argument. Every code change to a blockchain is a fork. Two separate chains were created, by definition. Just because no one is running the old chain doesn't mean it doesn't exist. This is open-source code, and no one is being forced to run mystery code. Anyone can run the code they chose.

If the Steem witnesses had set up some sockpuppets to keep running HF22, and then they changed the name of Steem to something else, would you still think it was theft? They could have easily done that. Nothing would be different.

"See, we didn't steal your coins; your coins are right there on HF22."

Of course the value of those coins would be zero because they would have no connection to the exchanges and no one would be looking to buy them or develop that fork; zero liquidity.

If we "prove" that Steem stole coins, then we also prove that Hive stole coins. Is it really worth it to set this precedence for the entire cryptoshpere just to try and fuck over Justin Sun when we already won this fight? That's just greedy hubris and revenge-based action.

Broken Record

How many times do I have to say this?

CRYPTO IS GOVERNANCE; HIVE IS OUR COUNTRY.

You don't go asking another country to fix your country's governance, do you? If the United States government (NSA) seized money from a bank account because that money threatened their very existence, do you really think someone can take them to court (controlled by USA) and win because "this is theft"? Seriously, this logic we are using is a joke.

This logic we are using is the opposite of the spirit of crypto; asking another governance structure to take control and handle business; the same corrupt governance structures we were trying to get away from in the first place.

Make no mistake:

Justin Sun owns Steem. That mother fucker bought our country! Unbelievable! He forced us to rebuild our home with a different distribution. This was not theft. Justin Sun rebuilt Steem with a different distribution. This is also NOT THEFT. If you prove it is theft with trickery now, that precedence is going to be used against us and every other modified-distro fork in the future. NOT SMART.

The real power of crypto.

The real power of crypto is obviously in decentralization. When something is decentralized and borderless, it CAN'T be regulated by another government. This is what makes it so powerful.

Flip-Flopping

What I'm getting at here is that if we prove what Justin Sun did is theft, then we also prove that what Hive did is theft, but theoretically, if Hive is decentralized enough, it doesn't matter and we will be immune to retribution.

What Justin Sun has done might not be theft, but it is most definitely security fraud. He is in control of a security in a centralized manner (definition of security) and he is doing illegal things with it. Because Justin Sun is not a decentralized entity, he will be brought down for his crimes, of that I am sure of.

Conclusion

We just need to be aware of the risks. Hive was not an airdrop. It was a fork with a new distribution. Steem HF23 was the same thing: a fork with a new distribution. To prove one is theft is to prove the other. It doesn't matter if it is one person or 20 people making this decision. The theft logic is exactly the same.

If we want to continue down this path (I think we all do) we need to realize that if our decentralization isn't strong enough and witnesses start getting fucked by the long dick of the law, we are in serious trouble. To assume that we can convict Justin Sun and receive zero blowback ourselves could result in dire consequences. We should not allow ourselves to fall victim to this hubris.

Bros!

We already won!
Is it really worth twisting the knife?

Yes! Duh! What could possibly go wrong?!

:D

Sort:  
Loading...

CRYPTO IS GOVERNANCE; HIVE IS OUR COUNTRY.

Satoshi created Bitcoin to get away from government controlled fiat currencies.
That is not the same as trying to get away from ALL government and ALL laws.

Hive is NOT a country.
To be a country requires sovereignty, which is a lot more than governance.

Sovereignty requires exclusive use of lethal force within a geographical area. A blockchain community can NEVER achieve this.

Blockchains and cryptocurrencies will always be subject to some external law, particularly criminal law that is fairly universal.

Usually what you write makes sense. But not today. :)

Oh you nut!
Haven't you ever been in a debate class?
I haven't, but I've talked to people that were!
God! They were annoying!

😂

I hope you guys can see at this point that 'airdrop' and 'changed the code' are exactly the same thing. If we win a court case against Steem for theft, we are setting a dangerous legal precedent that can later be used against us and any other fork that modifies distribution of funds.

They're not the same thing. Using Theycallmedan as an example, he spent 1 million plus USD to buy in. Using some of the others, they were initial miners whose contributions at the beginning were responsible for the creation/foundation of the chain. Everyone involved also in one way shape or form put in either money, time etc to accumulate the Steem that was stolen.

In the created chain airdrop, not one person put in one penny (other than the facilitators of setting up and running) nor time for the initial coins airdropped.

No way can this be construed as the same thing. For it to be the same thing, Justin would have to do a fork that left all original stake alone yet create a new fork that would airdrop to everyone EXCEPT those he targets.

One is theft. The other was excluding Justin Sun and (with the exception of a few innocents) the punk ass bitches who support him and his thieving dictatorial ways.

To assume that we can convict Justin Sun and receive zero blowback ourselves could result in dire consequences. We should not allow ourselves to fall victim to this hubris.

Not seeing it as explained above the same as all, the differences show they aren't. If those stolen from are unable to be made whole, I most certainly hope they are able to find some form of recompense through the legal system. They accrues their stake through their know how, equipment and in some cases large monetary investments. If this is allowed to stand due to some claim that code makes it alright to be a thief, crypto might as well hang it up and call it a day. No one in their right mind would invest in it (not that many are yet really).

Theft is defined by the governance structure that defines theft.
Steem is a governance structure.
If Steem says it isn't theft, then it isn't theft.

If Switzerland does something that America says is theft, is it theft?
Not according to Switzerland.

At that point the only way to resolve the issue is with a war by force.
The whole point of blockchains is that you can't go to war with them.
They are borderless; they exist in all physical spaces that have access to the Internet.

To say that this is theft is to give power back to the government that is enslaving you.
Tread carefully.

Freedom from debt slavery.

We took all the real value away from Steem and pumped it into Hive, and now we are trying to say Steem is stealing from us and we need to resolve this in a court sanctioned by the USA? It's a greedy and nonsensical argument. Truly, we just might get away with it, which would be hilarious.

Theft is defined by the governance structure that defines theft.

Pretty sure that throughout history, when people were stolen from they didn't need the government to understand they had been relieved of their property.

They are borderless

I've seen this asserted a lot in crypto, noticing with every year the growing regulations and clampdowns grow. None of us live in a borderless country, and at any moment the central authorities could do whatever they deem necessary through whatever show of force they might need to deploy. It is unavoidable that they will be involved in crypto, all resistance to that will be squashed, of that I have no doubt. Just because we aren't interested in them for the most part, doesn't mean they aren't interested in us.

I have no doubt that many who were stolen from have filed their necessary paperwork in regards to explaining movements of large sums of money as required by KYC/AMA. Most likely they have been paying taxes on the money as well.

In their shoes, I would go scorched earth on Justin Sun. He doesn't get to hide behind some abstract idea that theft is no longer theft because some code (that he implemented) said it was no longer theft. That shit may fly in some abstract world, but in the real world people get hurt (by street justice) and jailed for much less. The law has already made sure they need to pay their share and jump through hoops to be free of being molested by government kidnapping and violence. They might as well employ the good that comes with the bad from that.

We took all the real value away from Steem and pumped it into Hive, and now we are trying to say Steem is stealing from us and we need to resolve this in a court sanctioned by the USA?

He stole nothing from me nor most of us, in thanks because of many of those he just stole from creating this new chain. But he did steal from some, and quite large amounts. I might be repeating myself now, so will wrap this up and leave you last word if you want. I know this is one of those few times we won't see eye to eye. But to sum up, I'm so outraged by what Justin has been pulling, if he were to fall victim to street justice and I were on the jury? I would do my best to convince the jury even if there were video of the event to utilize jury nullification. Ok, done for reals now.

I think we see eye to eye quite well. Remember, I am hosting a debate here with myself and playing "Devil's Advocate". What Sun has done here is absolutely 100% securities fraud. Proving that to a court is another matter (although I expect an indictment).

None of us live in a borderless country

I've talked about crypto city-states about a dozen times.
Trust me, they are coming, and people will flock to them.

I use this picture often:
city state.jpg

#lastword (this might be the first time I've said this without getting a reply)
Going to ruin my 10/10 record.

If Switzerland does something that America says is theft, is it theft?
Not according to Switzerland.

Steemit and Justin Sun (physically present in the US) are subject to US law. Crypto in the US is defined as property. @theycallmedan et al. merely have to display to a court their property was misappropriated by a cartel controlled by them. A judge will give zero fcks about the governance structure of Steem if that governance structure was manipulated to unlawfully seize his property, any more than they would give credit to a hacker adding zeros to his bank balance.

You're really reaching.

You're really reaching.

I mean it is a "Devil's Advocate" post.
Isn't that like the definition of "reaching"?
Assuming the myth is true, what kind of idiot would side with the Devil?

It's a good thought exercise, though I'm sure some BPs have become elevated!

Reaching is still reaching! This was a good exploration of the mental gymnastics taking place within the thick skulls of your average Justin Sun sycophant.

The IRS has already given its authoritative opinion on the matter. Hive was the creation of a new asset. HF 23 was the upgrading of an existing asset.

Steem made it clear, so did Hive, so there isn't even really an argument.

The IRS has already given its authoritative opinion on the matter.

Have they?

Also, who cares what the IRS says?
They are exactly the type of authority we are trying to free ourselves from.

This isn't even an IRS issue IMO.
SEC authority applies here, if anything.

I am curious to see what you are talking about though.

You can find a clear explaination in the wikipeadia article for hard fork, ref.10

Here is the IRS .pdf:
https://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-drop/rr-19-24.pdf

There is actually an easy test, it wasn't a split because the history of hf23 will not diverge.

In theory people could run hf22, but it is not the consensus, so oddly it would be the new asset.

Nice, thanks.

Nonsense start to finish.

The Sybil attack in March should have been litigated, but that would have been a very hard case and needed blockchain and computer knowledge.

This case is now simple theft, oldest crime on the books (that and murder). No blockchain knowledge necessary.

Ah then you agree that the Hive HF is theft and we are going to get away with it because we are decentralized. Interesting.

I wonder... I get the reasoning... BUT.

How can you steal something he didn't own in the first place. I mean, he was told in advance that he wouldn't be getting any Hive. I don't see how that would be theft.

The value of Hive at the creation was basically 0. No-one could have known beforehand it would even appreciate. Justin also didn't invest in Hive, he invested in Steem. So if the so-called theft happened in the time of the fork, we would have stolen exactly $0 from Justin.

On the other hand, Steem as a currency token did already have established worth, it was also longer on a blockchain, but a on simple centralized ledger, and Justin took away millions of dollars from their owners.

I'd like to point out that since it isn't a blockchain anymore, the "country" argument kind of falls flat.

How can you steal something he didn't own in the first place.

Using the same logic, no one owned Steem coins on HF23; this was a also a totally new coin, and the users were told in advance that they wouldn't be getting any.

We confuse this issue because they kept the same branding, but the code is different and not backwards compatible like a soft-fork.

I'd like to point out that since it isn't a blockchain anymore, the "country" argument kind of falls flat.

You better not live in America, or otherwise you are showcasing your ignorance of your government's ultimate imperialist tactics that seek to control everything. When we install a puppet government somewhere that place is no longer a country? Get real.

That is exactly what happened here. Imperialist pig Justin Sun invaded Steem and installed a puppet government. It's still a country... it's just a weak country that's being controlled by another entity.

Using the same logic, no one owned Steem coins on HF23; this was a also a totally new coin, and the users were told in advance that they wouldn't be getting any.

You forget, that the HF22 chain was destroyed in the process, there was nothing left for those people who owned those coins. Effectively this meant they lost. Telling them beforehand didn't help because they weren't even given the option to keep their coins, Justin had power over all the top 20 witnesses remember. Also, Justin still has his Steem, he never lost it. Your logic is faulty.

When we install a puppet government somewhere that place is no longer a country?

Apples and oranges. Blockchain, not a country either.

Yeah, you can't delete open-source code that exists on hundreds of servers.
You're really out of your element on this one.

This community split has 2 sides: Hive vs Steem.
Both sides changed their distribution to nullify the top players of the other community.
This is how DPOS works; end of story.

People who think there should be some magical third community that rescues a fork where both Hive and Steem whales both have stake? You're living in a fantasy land; no one wants to be a part of that community, which is exactly why that fork is dead.

Not going to argue this when I'm almost asleep.

All I want to ask is:

Did all the guys who lost Steem have the blockchain saved on their servers, and if they did, do they still have Steem, or some other cryptocurrency?

Every Steem node has a record of what happened. It can't be erased. Anyone who wants to start producing blocks on HF22 is free to do so... Oh wait, you'd have to fork out Steemit Inc's stake... oh wait, we already did that.

As far as what the currency is called, I think it's hilarious that people put so much weight on intellectual property law and corporate branding. When something is open-source you can call it whatever you want. We are so brainwashed by the old fucked up centralized system of economic slavery and ownership that this new emergent cooperative economy doesn't even make sense to us. Sad.

Not giving someone a birthday present isn't a theft of the birthday present they never had.

I don't need a lecture and dumbed-down simplistic metaphors to understand this issue.
I understand this issue quite well.

DPOS is a governance structure. If you make the laws, it's pretty hard to prove that you are breaking the law, because obviously you're the one making them. Theft is defined by the governance structure that applies.

Clearly, you do not accept the sovereignty of Steem and you believe that the laws of another nation apply in this case. Perhaps this is because you are an imperialist pig. Perhaps it's because Steem is a centralized piece of shit and Steemit Inc is clearly in violation of securities law.

Consider that I understand this issue better than you do,
and I will do the same.

This is simply theft of an existing asset.

The thing to prove for the thought exercise to work is whether the same code applied to a new asset is theft.

But I agree there never was an "airdrop" beyond the term used in the announcement of hive's launch. The ledger backs there was no airdrop, only past wallet transactions. That could have been handled better but would have required more time and been a much more processing intense operation at the time of actual forking.

Why does everyone think this was an existing asset?
Because they kept the same branding "Steem"?
Every hardfork is a new asset.
It's very clear.
New code; new asset.
If this was not the case the Hive would also not be a "new asset", which it "obviously" is.

Think about the difference between Steem and Hive.

Calling Steem HF23 an "old asset" and Hive HF23 a "new asset" is ridiculous.

If anything, Steem is the new asset and Hive is the old asset.
Hive has 90%+ of the Layer 0 intact.
Think about it.

Why does everyone think this was an existing asset?

Because the people don’t really give much priority to understanding the nitty-gritty of backends. They just see that token is same in their wallet and on exchanges. Didn’t require to be listed again.

If analysed purely on the technicalities, then yes I totally agree. Blocktrades pre-hive post about forks also backs it. In a future with blockchain specialized courts this may be an important thing, but right now I don’t see any prosecutor reject the case because the understanding isn’t that far yet.

Also, while I understand the devil’s advocate part, is this really how we want to mainstream? I know it’s not how I imagine mainstraiming will (ever) happen.

Well what I actually think is that we WILL be able to have our cake and eat it too. We can "steal funds" and when a centralized attacker "steals funds" in return we can take them to court and win and they can't take us to court. Only centralized authorities can be regulated. And they will be. That's the crazy part.

It would appear you understand DPOS, great. Unfortunately code is only law until it meets a real judge in the real world at which point it most certainly is not law.

Steem and Hive aren't sovereign. Sorry.

And what will you say when a crypto city-state pops up?
What will you say when Hive owns physical land and makes the laws?
You seem blind to where this is going.
The coming storm is going to knock most people on their ass.
Are you prepared for water shortage, famine, and war?
I'm not but I'm trying.

@brianoflondon & I actually live in a country that was (re)created by an idea and a group of people (many still alive) who fought to achieve it against the greatest of odds and at huge cost. Indeed it is considered by many to be miracle.

You have no idea what it takes to achieve sovereignty - it is extremely difficult and rarely comes without great bloodshed.
Neither Hive nor any other crypto project has even a fraction of the attributes of a sovereign entity.

If a crypto city-state pops up it will likely be very quickly crushed by whatever country's territory it pops up in.

A judge in what country?
These people are mafia.
Do you know how the mafia works?
Judges get bought.

Do you think Justin Sun gives a shit if Steemit Inc gets sued into bankruptcy?
He's hiding behind a Limited Liability Corporation.
Steemit Inc is broke and doesn't have any money.

If you win in court he doesn't owe dollars; he owes Steem.
Watch him dump Steem to sub one cent and then claim Steemit Inc was hacked and has $0.
He'll declare bankruptcy and get away scot free.
You guys don't know what the fuck you're talking about and this strategy is shit and can only hurt Hive.

TILTED!

tilt.jpg

Apologies.

You clearly don't even understand the difference between a criminal case (=jail) and a civil case (=$).
A LLC is no protection in a criminal conspiracy theft case.
A Judge in the US or UK cannot be bought by Justin Sun, a Chinese national, especially in such a clear cut theft case and especially in the current international environment.

if we prove what Justin Sun did is theft, then we also prove that what Hive did is theft

I disagree with this premise. Many can show actual transaction history via exchanges as evidence of a purchase of property (crypto in the US is defined as property), while hive was created out of thin air. Steem has a white paper to define its operation and was probably purchased as property on the 'your keys/your coins' basic premise of crypto. Hive was free to create entirely new rules, which they did. They created new property out of thin air, and while they used Steem as the basis, they were under no obligation to duplicate the steem blockchain in every conceivable manner. The entire point of the fork was not to do that. Otherwise, why have a fork in the first place?

Every time a HF is pushed the money appears out of thin air and two projects are created. 22 Hardforks in a row the community did not split. The one time the community splits both sides call each other criminals. If you can't see why that's ridiculous I don't know what to say.

20 years down the line people will look back at these arguments and think:

Wow! We were really dumb and had no idea what the fuck we were talking about!

And I include myself in that list.

Only one side can demonstrate that property was TAKEN from them, as opposed to not being CREATED FOR them.

It is ridiculous, and 'they' can call each other whatever they want. I agree, it will probably be 20 years before 'I didn't get my fork' is covered under any law, though I am still skeptical regarding a person being entitled to the labor of others. Creating a new blockchain, whether it was derived from the old or not, still involves labor. Property however has been a legal construct for millennia, and there is little ambiguity there now that crypto is viewed as such.

Ah yes, but the value of a crypto rests almost entirely within the foundation of a layer 0 community, so when we forked to Hive we siphoned a ton of value ("took it") from Steem and cut them out of the new chain. In fact, we gained even more value by cutting them out, because all the stake we siphoned was a liability to the network rather than an asset.

I agree, it will probably be 20 years before 'I didn't get my fork' is covered under any law.

A law? A law in what country? By then hopefully everything is crypto and everyone will realize that crypto is the governance structure. Therefore, it is impossible for Steem to steal because Steem literally is an opt-in sovereign entity that makes the laws. Another country could say a theft has occurred, but that country's laws do not apply so it doesn't matter.

Is not only a fork with a new distribution is also a new coin with different value, STEEM keeps having the same coin and value before and after the fork. That can be easily argumented. Are different cases, is good to be critical to see the weak points of the argumentation of Apshamilton if they were, but in this particular issue I see a lot of differences. Imo of course.

I think we can agree that the people who moved to Hive already got way way more value out of Steem than they were ever expecting. This is because the current Steem community is buying those bags and trying to keep the project afloat.

I've personally received thousands of dollars from my powerdowns ($500 a week for 9 weeks). This is vastly more than I ever expected.

Most of the stake that was funneled to @community321 was a danger to the Steem network, just like the stake Hive forked out was a danger to their network. We are trying to have our cake and eat it too. Let me tell you, this cake is delicious. Yum Yum.

Yeah agree with you completely and JS made us a favour by keeping the price quite high for the shitshow STEEM has been lately. I managed to increase substantially my account while making some invests in Exode and Splinterlands. Very happy with it.

Also this blockchain is starting to look as a real community, the example of the white knight and the work ApsHamilton has done proves that we can do very well in this new path.

Interesting times.

You also need to reevaluate your argument.

Is not only a fork with a new distribution is also a new coin with different value...

So you are making the argument that it would be totally unfair to transfer the value of a coin to a new distribution and leave the old fork high and dry... you mean exactly what Hive did? You see? We can't get around the obvious mirror image of the situation.

We took all the real value away from Steem and dumped it into Hive and stole that value away from the stake attacking us. They do the same thing and it's theft. Double standard.

The only real reason we can make these justifications is that they are the aggressors and they started this whole sequence of events. If you ask me, this is a pretty weak foundation to stand on. Much weaker than we, as a whole, believe it to be.

We took all the real value away from Steem and dumped it into Hive and stole that value away from the stake attacking us. They do the same thing and it's theft. Double standard.

😄 Nice argumentation but the real value of the coin wasn't only the economic value of it, (the price and volume) but the community that backed that value, the people who spent their money (with other crypto and FIAT) and time to build their stakes, and you can't say that HIVE thieved people, that isn't reasonable anywhere (not in a court nor in a blockchain) they choosed to be here.

You can say that this is a weak argument because we dumped the coin that still had support from many people (who also built their stake) that stayed in STEEM but this only happened because the support of the mayority of STEEM users that are now HIVE users, the experiment could have failed and therefore the value of STEEM will remain.

And also you can't say that we stole to JS a money that he hadn't before. This is not the case of the witnesses sadly.

This is a tricky situation indeed.

We've created quite a few precedents in the crypto world.

The interesting part is, people were generally told: "not your keys, not your coins". After Hf23 on Steem, what should they be told?

The solution is rather interesting too. Trust an exchange to do the right thing. So a centralized, "not your keys" entity, rather than a blockchain mechanism. Granted, Steem is a hideous example of a blockchain right now, 100% centralized and transferring people's funds without consent. Chinese Communist Party would be proud.

You mentioned throughout comments a metaphor that each country makes its own laws.

Where you are wrong in the metaphor is that another country or even a citizen cannot dispute these laws. For that there are International Courts. Bittrex plays the role of an International Court right now. Unless they choose to pass the hot potato to a different Court, one outside crypto world.

Where you are wrong in the metaphor is that another country or even a citizen cannot dispute these laws.

It's certainly something I thought of but I'm already overcomplicating this issue.

The funds might never reach JS in the end and I think it shouldn't. Witnesses are the maintainers of the network and none should effectively control it. This is decentralization.

Using your arguments, the best course of action would have been to keep running witnesses on the old fork, and convince exchanges that it was the legitimate Steem. Of course, we still would have had to deal with getting those witnesses into the top 20 spots.

Unfortunately it looks like that ship has already sailed. I assume that the exchanges are all in the middle of replaying 23 at the moment since I can't dump my steem right now.

All that being said, the real issue here is that Justin Sun controls all top witness spots with his massive stake. This is a major flaw in the entire system if you ask me, and something that Hive is going to have to figure out how to fix at some point.

And that is exactly what would have happened if we hadn't of forked to Hive yet. HF22 would have become Hive. However, since we already did the work there's obviously no point.

Perhaps we should have just called Hive Steem.

That might have breached intellectual property protections.

Not sure, someone else might chime in here. I thought 'Steemit' was the property. Who decides which chain gets to be called Steem?

I have long worried that exchanges would start delisting both HIVE and STEEM due to all of this...

I can't imagine Hive getting delisted.
The problem has always been with Steem and the centralized Sybil attack.

Damn devil's advocate sucks! I get it though, it's hard to swallow it but if you think of it with logic rather than emotion it makes sense. What is the best path forward though? That's the million dollar question.

The little guys like you and me don't even have to worry about it.
That's the best part.
We just get to sit back and eat !popcorn.
Enjoy the show!

Yeah, I'm a redfish compared to some of these people lol it's ok though, I kind of like the anonymity of it all. Bigger stake you have, the more eyes on you.

Yep, just imagine if Hive were to spike up to like $100 a coin because millions of people were here due to some "killer dapp".

All of a sudden you've got half a million dollars and you've become "one of the top 0.1% elite". You might find you don't like the attention.

On that note, if Hive goes x100 my upvote is going to be $100... ten times a day... like... wtf.
It sounds stupid to say out loud but it is fully within the realm of possibility considering everything that's going on.

An app used by 10 million people is not going to take HIVE to $100. 95% to 99% of HIVE's value comes from it being used by traders to get their hands on more Bitcoin unless Bitcoin goes way beyond a million dollars. Entirely organic valuation of HIVE in the single digit dollar range would probably require hundreds of millions of users. Twitter is capable of squeezing about $9 of revenue from one monthly active user PER YEAR. RC's would have to be dirt cheap to attract that kind of crowds.

HIVE's current valuation is outlandishly high. 40,000 or so monthly active users. A market cap of over $100 million. Ridiculously high. The only reason it is that high is because it's listed on exchanges where has a trading pair against Bitcoin.

Out of all the things I've said here, I'm blown away that you've decided to focus on my random speculation. Crypto is a gold mine; more like "Unobtainium"; and we miners have no idea how to profit from this mine because the process is currently unknown to us. We swing our pickaxes at the rockface and little tiny chips break off and we gobble them up. If you want to cut a diamond the best way to do it is with a diamond cutter, what a paradox.

The things we can accomplish here are unprecedented. Are you factoring in USD hyperinflating in conjunction with a total economic meltdown of the legacy system? Are you factoring in millions of people looking desperately for any work that they can find for any wage that is available?

There is a straight up tidal wave on the horizon, and Hive is a magical surf board.

if they changed the name to steem2.