RE: Hive: A True Digital Nation In The Making
You are viewing a single comment's thread:
Hive is far from a digital nation. One of the defining characteristics of a network state is that it achieves diplomatic recognition. Hive is far from that. And likening communities to cities is outrageous. Some Hive communities don't even act like communities. The City of Neoxian is probably the closest thing Hive has at this point, but it really is just a community.
To see what a true network city looks like, check out Cabin.
Of course, none of this is to say that Hive can't become a network city, or even a network state. But it needs to quit acting liking a platform, and Hivers need to stop patting themselves on the back on the basis of dreams and actually achieve something as a community first. So far, it's nothing more than an echo chamber of Web3 enthusiasts, and that's coming from a Web3 enthusiast.
Instead of looking at the mountain and saying, "I can climb that!," how about actually climbing the mountain and showing the world that we can?
Forking this chain from STEEM was something achieved by the community.
Borehole projects in Ghana are achievements by this community, bringing clean water supply to hundreds of people.
Tell me what are the Cabin's achievements?
And why do you think that we have to narrow what we define as a network state to what is described in the network state book? We can form our own kind of network state without satisfying the criteria in the book. The book is not an authority on what a network state is.
@mrtats, thanks for the response! Here's my retort:
The book to which I linked (titled The Network State) defines what a network state is. Nobody talked about network states until Balaji Srinivasen defined what that is. If you're going to call yourself that, you should have a decent respect for the person who came up with the idea. Calling yourself a pumpkin doesn't make you a pumpkin.
As for Hive's achievements, get familiar with my work. I'm a big fan of Hive's. I've praised it in many places as the best example of Web3 social media decentralization. I'm also on the record as saying it is my favorite Web3 social media platform. In my newsletter, I tell the world why Hive is so good and why they should use it, on a regular basis, going so far as to include monthly reports on my earnings here (where I earn more than on any other Web3 social media platform).
So, you see, I'm not anti-Hive.
The STEEM/Hive fork was accomplished by the witnesses, not the entire Hive community. Sure, the Hive community was supportive, but unless you're a witness, all you did was watch passively and collect your free airdrop of Hive tokens.
The Borehole projects in Ghana are great achievements, but did they involve all of Hive or just one regional community within Hive? By the way, I've written about Hive Ghana and the great things that the Hive Ghana community are doing. But their achievements aren't exactly driving mass worldwide adoption. And need you ask what Cabin has achieved? I pointed that out in the comment to which you responded. They've built a real network city in just two years! In other words, they're not just talking about it, but they've actually done it!
My comment above was not a criticism of Hive. I was addressing the constant barrage of over-optimism and self-congratulatory praise that takes place on a regular basis by self-appointed Hive evangelists like the author of this post. I'm not trying to be mean. I'm just pointing out that a more sober-minded approach to discussing what makes Hive great may be more effective. Perhaps?
There were people who came up with the idea of heliocentric solar system before Copernicus, but we mostly attribute it to him today. Being first to an idea doesn't make you an authority on it and I disagree with Balaji Srinivasen's view of network states. I don't have to give respect to someone who was first to a logical conclusion of crypto communities and economies.
If community did not support the move, Hive today would worth didley squat. See BLURT and other forks.
Yes, since it is getting funded by multiple people that are not part of the Ghana Community. Even if people outside of community were not directly involved, all of Hive is contributing to every project on Hive by providing and generating value. If no body here provided and generated value, there would be no bore hole project.
Also what Cabin has achieved is not something hard. Building a few cabins in the woods, people did that before Cabin existed. I own an apartment can I declare it an apartment on Hive and create the first ever apartment of Hive? I don't think so. Show me the economic output of Cabin then we can talk about their achievement.
To be clear this is one of the parts I disagree with Balaji Srinivasen, in my view a network state is not required to own physical assets. A network state can be formed virtually, and be represented by its members in the physical world.
I did not say you were anti-hive, if I did it would have been an oxymoron. Since you are here and contributing value to Hive. What I said was that you are stuck on a narrow band of view.
Strawman.
Yes it does.
Disagreement is fine, but at least give a hat tip to pioneering thought on a subject.
You don't owe anyone respect, but no one owes it to you either. Respect is earned. Srinivasen has earned my respect even if he hasn't earned yours.
Agreed.
This is very easy to verify. All you have to do is join Cabin.City and see it for yourself. They did more than just build cabins in the woods. And economic output isn't the sole determinant of a community, city, state, etc.
You should learn about something before you talk about it. If there is any such thing as common sense, this is it. Again, it's super easy to get a handle on what Cabin is and has done.
Disagreeing with someone is fine. I don't think a network state must necessarily own physical assets either. And I'm not sure that Srinivasen believes that either.
That's precisely what this image of a network state shows (taken from Srinivasen's book).
I absolutely am not. I believe in giving deference where deference is due. Hive is not living up to its full potential, but it's no one's fault really. It is what it is, but it isn't a nation. It's barely a community. It can still be improved. Might it some day be a nation? Perhaps, but it will have a lot of hills to climb to get there. Cabin did in two years what Steem/Hive have failed to do seven, but these are entirely different beasts. It's like comparing a watermelon to Deep Space.
It is there to establish the point that being first to something doesn't mean you become the authority on it.
No, it doesn't. But since the first example failed, let's give another example.
Today, most people pronounce the GIF with a hard-g despite the format's creator saying that it is pronounced by soft-g. IF being first to an idea made him the authority on the subject we all should be using the soft-g but that is not the case. Because anything that is not fact-based can't have an authority on it.
Your achievement argument comes from Srinivasen's definition of a network state, which as I said earlier I disagree with.
Taken from Srinivasen's book's Chapter 5. As I said this is one of the things I disagree with Srinivasen but not the only one, I pretty much disagree with all of it.
According to him, a network state must consist of homogeneous minds. Cannot be a community of communities. Require a leader etc.
So I don't defer to his view of what a network state is and I'll never will.
As there are nation states that don't conform to definitions put forth. There would be network states that will not conform to definitions. (De-jure vs de-facto.) And as there are multiple definitions for nation states, there would be multiple definitions for network states.
And Hive in my opinion is on its way to becoming a de facto network state in the future.
Okay, think about the logic there. Essentially, what you're saying is 1 million people being wrong makes the 1 person who is right wrong. Do you seriously believe that?
For many years, most of the planet thought the earth was flat. Was it flat? No. It wasn't then and it's not now. Someone came along and educated the rest of us on what the earth really looks like. Then we got pictures of it.
You can use this logic on anything. Just because an idea is popular doesn't mean it is correct. If the creator says it's pronounced with a soft G, then that's the correct way. But I'd presume that, in the case of GIFs, the creator isn't going to go around knocking everyone on the head for mispronouncing it. So, the hard G becomes the culturally acceptable variation, but that doesn't mean it's correct. This is the case with a lot of malapropisms.
For instance, have you ever heard someone say, "for all intensive purposes?" It's very common. But it's wrong. What they mean is, "for all intents and purposes." Other popular examples are "irregardless" and "I could care less." These are incorrect, but very popular.
No it doesn't. It comes from their achievements. Take away Srinivaen's definition and Cabin has still achieved something no one else has.
Okay, fair enough. But you can disagree with an authority and still respect their work. Hardly anyone writes like Shakespeare any more. Hardly anyone even tries. But you'll be hard pressed to find a writer anywhere on the planet who would say Shakespeare wasn't a great writer or poet. Even people who argue that he had a ghostwriter or wasn't a real person still recognize the skill involved in what he did. Not liking someone's musical style doesn't mean they aren't a good musician. I can gather up several dozen examples of musical artists I don't care for, but I'd still recognize their skill.
Which is? Tell me in concrete detail what they have achieved.
False equivalence, one is something that is based on facts the other is subjective and does not have an objective truth that can be applied.
Same for language, the wrong usage of words could become the new correct way of saying things because language is not something objective that stays that way all the time. If millions of people use soft-g when pronouncing the GIF, it will be the correct way to use soft-g when pronouncing GIF.
And I haven't said that I don't respect his work, I said I don't defer to his view. Maybe I should write a critique of the Network State and become an authority on the subject myself. If publishing a book is all it takes to become an authority on something.
I told you. They have a bona fide network city, but it's not just a bunch of cabins in the woods. They have a DAO with a very specific purpose, and they live up to that purpose. That's not to say it can't be improved. I'm looking forward to seeing how it grows. Of course, it could all fall apart once they have 100 properties and 5,000 members. Currently, they have a couple hundred members and a couple dozen properties, which the DAO doesn't own. But that itself a part of the achievement. They don't have to own the properties because what they're doing isn't about the property. It's about the community.
You should. That's really all it takes. But it also opens you up to a lot of criticism. Every great conquest must endure great battles.
See this is what I am talking about, this is not a real achievement, it is something that has been done for years with some crypto added for seasoning. It is nothing new.
And as I told you earlier, I have a few properties if I declare them hive properties do hive get to achieve the same thing? If it is about community, hive already has achieved more than cabin or do you have a very specific narrow definition of "community" that only cabin can achieve?
You have to check it yourself. You're not understanding the concept. The Hive community is nothing like the Cabin community. Very different cultures.
I believe the title says "in the making".
Does that mean that it is here now? No.
Okay, fair enough.