![x.PNG](https://images.hive.blog/DQmbxzJGfGPodotm4wx2XJ9nTwyugnorU1TEbBEkNKK9dF5/x.PNG)

You may have heard in the lates news that Elon Musk is planning to rebrand Twitter to **X** and replace the blue bird logo. Many have been speculating that this is a first step towards Musk's vision of turning Twitter/X into an ***Everything App***. Musk have previously expressed this idea of building something like **WeChat** on top of Twitter. *WeChat* is probably the only platform that comes close to the idea of Everything App. The story of *WeChat* and its owner company *Tencent* is a fascinating one. The app and the company was in the right place at the right time, still are. Replicating the similar success may require something more than money, resources, vision, and knowledge. Even if all ingredients were available to create something like *Everything App*, I strongly disagree it would be a good idea.

There are benefits of Everything App. It creates convenience for users having central hub for everything used on daily bases and using same credentials. Otherwise keeping track of all credentials for various platforms is not an easy task. It is also good for companies who can achieve that because they capture all the profits regardless what features or apps within the App users are using. Obviously this leads to monopoly and extreme forms of centralization. Companies, especially big tend, always tend to move towards more and more monopoly and centralization. Perhaps, it is because that's how they see expanding business and creating more revenue streams. But can see this with almost all big tech companies. That does create inconvenience for many, although it keeps competition alive.

First example is iOS vs Android. Both Apple and Google compete with each other in this space. Imagine a world where the operating systems were for mobile devices were similar. This way developers or companies wouldn't have to create two separate apps on two separate platforms to make sure they can catch the full market. It is highly unlikely Android will ever switch to Swift programming language, nor will Apple switch to Java. So, as long as both operating systems exist there will have to be two separate apps that do the same exact thing. Those who are unable to support both platforms will miss out on the rest of customer base. In fact, just having two options is not a good system either. Perhaps in the future we will see a third option like linux and maybe even a decentralized version. Both companies, Google and Apple have monopolistic tendencies and have proven so in the past. Google too wanted to dominate the social and apps space, not only with Android operating system, but also with their ambitions in creating a social media platform, at which they have failed numerous times. 

Let's look at Meta. Not too long ago we have known them only as Facebook and their other apps were just acquisitions. With all of their acquisitions, and statements, it is clear Meta wants to capture all aspects of people digital lives. Their goal is to continue to be powerful player in social, photo & video sharing, messaging, virtual reality, gaming, etc. If it was up to them they wouldn't want to share anything with other platforms or companies. This has become even more clear when they launched Threads. All of these companies old or new try to gain as much control as possible, because ultimately this control would translate into profits for their investors. Even the startups that initially start with vision and goals to benefit the people they serve, later in their life they are persuaded to bring more money for investors. Question is can any one of them be successful in doing both, providing honest and genuine services to their customer and making money for the shareholders.

If there were to be an Everything App or platform, I can see benefits of it for streaming services. What Netflix started has been copied by many more, and there are many streaming services now. Everything App of streaming platforms would definitely be convenient. It would eliminate the need for maintaining multiple subscriptions and would allow easy discovery of content. However, if such thing were to happen, this would lead to monopoly as well and would affect the quality of content and service. There are already mergers and acquisitions happening or being discussed so consolidate the space. At least the competition continues to improve both content and services. This also allows users to subscribe and unsubscribe as they wish. It is still better than dealing with something like Comcast. I am not sure what would be better for the future of streaming services. I can only suggest one, that I would suggest for rest of the digital space. Instead of Everything App, the goal should be for Everything Network. Let the apps and platforms compete within one network. A network where none of the platforms have control over. A decentralized network.

Jack Dorsey had a good idea when he was the CEO of Twitter. Jack did speak about decentralized solutions for social media platforms. He even funded the Bluesky project. Unfortunately, it didn't turn out to be what we hoped it would. I don't know a lot about Bluesky, but what I know so far doesn't suggest anything decentralized. Moreover, I was disappointed with the research that was done on decentralized system. They completely missed it. At least the idea was the good one. All apps and platforms using one decentralized system. So that no company has control over the network, but are participants of the networks, and compete with each other for users within the network.

In fact, this is what Hive does. There is no network, blockchain or otherwise that can provide such system at this time. At least not yet. What Hive does can easily be copied. I am still surprised has attempted to so far. Maybe it is not that easy. But the point is, there is a need for decentralized network that can power many apps and platforms. Hive has proven this. One decentralized network with many apps and games powered. But it not a big network yet. It very small compared to centralized platforms. Regardless, it remains to be the best decentralized solution that works today.

Any decentralized solution would have to have these core features:
* **Decentralized:** Can't be controlled or taken over by one entity or a group.
* **Ownership:** People own their accounts. No individual app or platform has power to delete an account. They can blacklist from their app or platform but can't delete it.
* **Wallet:** Digital life involved using money as well. Decentralized wallets and money is a must for current and future of the internet. People shouldn't have to ask permission from banks to participate in digital economies.
* **Free or affordable:** Using decentralized network shouldn't be difficult to join. Anybody should be able to join or leave as they please without any monetary obstacles.
* **Fast and free/affordable transactions:** All actions in the networks should be as fast as in traditional platforms. Otherwise we are going backwards. Simple things like sharing blog posts, photos, videos, documents shouldn't cost crazy fees. Unless it is some unique service. 

I am sure there are other features that could make decentralized solutions better that I am forgetting. Feel free to share in comments if you think of any. Hive does all of the above better than any solutions available today. Maybe Koinos could be a competition. But they don't have Hive's proven record yet. Centralized networks obviously don't qualify and they fail at the first three.

While Hive might be the best solution, copying Hive by forking is not that difficult. Hive is open source and anybody can fork and create a competing network. It is unlikely centralized platforms would take such path. As they are too arrogant to fork any existing decentralized solutions. They would rather create everything themselves, or at least try. But more importantly, decentralized solutions could significantly lower their profits and decrease their power. As long as there are millions and billions volunteering to use their services, they won't make any moves towards decentralization. This gives us, advocates of decentralization, to build and attract more people to embrace solutions that may benefit them compared to centralized solutions. Ultimately it will be upto people to decide. Developments, efforts, and money will flow where demand is. Hopefully demand for decentralized will continue to grow.

**Everything decentralized network is the way, not everything app!** Let me know your thoughts in the comments.