<div class="text-justify">

A couple of things came up at work today, which put me behind schedule. Nothing too dramatic, but with a delivery early tomorrow morning that I wasn't fully prepared for, I am now trying to close the gap and have worked the last few hours, instead of doing what I want to do, which is not work. It is closing in on 10pm though, ,so I am going to call it a night and write to clear my head, instead. 

![image.png](https://files.peakd.com/file/peakd-hive/tarazkp/23vhnnYLx1CDYrdjyDjNSdncnqVVkVTV63ejiQnxym81CNh1rW28NNM9CPTBEYJoC9hwS.png)

So many things floating about at the moment, it is hard to concentrate and that will translate into poor sleep, if I don't get it out. It isn't about writing it all down of course, just giving it some  air and letting the breeze of thought take it away. I have often enough written about the cathartic nature of writing, so I won't travel that road tonight. 

I had a conversation recently about content, which is always one that I find interesting. It was centered around some downvotes and whether they were needed, which I don't necessarily have an opinion on in this case. However, I do think that those who are consistently well rewarded should *consistently* add value to the community in some way, and "filler content" by these people shouldn't necessarily be rewarded, especially if there is *more filler than content* flowing through. 

>It is taking the votes for granted.

I am someone who believes in lead by example, but it always depends on the example being followed, right? If a person sees someone who is rewarded constantly for relatively trash content, they are likely going to follow that lead, than someone consistently rewarded for good content. The fact is, that most people can't produce higher quality content, which is why the AIs are so popular, because it lowers the bar.

I had a discussion at work today about people using AIs like ChatGPT to produce their professional content, yet call themselves industry experts. Those chatbots don't produce expert opinions, they generate a middle of the road output, but it is very quick and easy. For someone who is not an expert or invested, it is "good enough" perhaps, but for someone who knows what they are talking about and are looking to spend millions for a business tool integration, it *doesn't cut it.* 

>Just more filler content to be sent to the trash.

But because it is easy to produce something quickly using it that at first glance seems okay, people cut the corner out of convenience and play the numbers game, rather than becoming an industry expert and targeting with real value. What they don't seem to account for however, is the cost to their reputation, where they are burning unknown bridges and most likely, the ones that will actually take them seriously enough and pay them well. It is the same on Hive a lot of the time too, isn't it? 

>Producing content is *easy.*

Producing good content that consistently engages a valuable audience, 

>*is not easy at all.*

Over the years, I have had a lot of hits and misses with my own content, which is to be expected, as not every piece is going to be a winner. Yet, overall, I have tried to improve my game and hit more winners than unforced errors. It isn't that everyone will agree with what I say or how I say it, and it definitely isn't about pandering to the audience, but writing about what people care about has value. The challenge is, what the hell do people care about? 

Commonly on Hive, that is *Hive,* but I don't think a person should rely on that. It annoys me when there are accounts that pretty much only write about Hive, and every headline mentions Hive, with Hive this and Hive that. When it is a stream of content, what it indicates is that the person isn't really an industry expert at all, nor a content creator, they are just farming the platform, pandering. It works for some. 

I used to write about Hive a lot and I still actually do a fair bit, but very few of my posts are just about Hive itself, because that bores me. It doesn't get all of the thoughts out of my head - there is more to my life than Hive.

> Though not much. 

I see Hive as a framework for a community, where there are the economic elements that most people talk about, but there are also the community elements, the personal side of the community. An economy without a community is useless, isn't it? When a person only focuses on the economics without regard for the community, they are missing the point of an economy itself, and they are missing the point of being a part of the community. 

>The economics are important.

Because the economics supports personal, interpersonal and community activities. And, if an economist doesn't really understand how a community functions, they might make money, but they don't necessarily add value. Corporations that have the continual goal to increase shareholder, may make money, but they can do so at the expense of the community itself, right? 

>I love economics. 

I am not an economist, but I have a keen interest in how economics affects our behaviors and the communities in which we live. It is not only fascinating to observe, but it is practical in the sense that it can be used to improve a community, *for better or worse.*

Hive is such a beautiful place for observing economic affects on behavior due to the transparent nature of it. Also, because in order for the majority to earn, the activities are public. After over six years on the platform, I have seen a lot of accounts come and go, with many staying also. It is interesting to observe how those that stayed have changed over time based on the economics. For example, where people who used to write good poetry, haven't written a poem for years, or others just stick Hive into the title of every post. 

>This is the affect of incentive.

*It is natural.*

Especially as we should all recognize that like it or not, we need money to survive in this world and most of us don't have enough to be comfortable. I know it is a challenge for me at times in the real world, but I also am someone who is excited by the opportunity to be part of a better economic system, one that affects behaviors positively, instead of bringing out the worst in us. 

>The worst shouldn't be rewarded.

While "be the change" is a nice sentiment, one of the things we can do to facilitate the change process, is to support those who are driving the change in the direction we think it should go. As people act on incentive, reward bad behavior and there will be an increase in bad behavior. Instead, there should be a disincentive for the behaviors we don't want to see more of and an incentive for what we do want to see more of.

This isn't clear cut for content on Hive piece by piece, but it is appropriate for content trends. Some trends lead to a better outcome for the community, some for a worse - and it is up to the community decide which is which and what is deserving of incentive and disincentive. 

Personally, I don't want Hive to be a place of filler content, because the internet is already *filled with filler,* because it is driven by the ad revenue model and clickbait. Hive is not. This means that the derivative and generic content that copycats what is already available or an AI puts out, is not going to position Hive in the market place for attracting value, because there would be nothing new here. For people coming into Hive, if they have to wade through a pile of homogenous content that is available on all the other platforms (possibly in a better quality form), why would they stay? 

Coming across one decent piece isn't enough to hold them on their attention on the platform, but having accounts that they learn to trust that produce what they can't get anywhere else, can keep them here. And, with the right kind of journey, they will start to become part of the community, roaming wider to find more content value for themselves. 

>It is a very slow process.

The popular platforms out there have been started with massive amounts of investor funds, that have allowed them to do all kinds of things in order to attract an audience, a user base and, to reward content creators. Hive doesn't have that kind of kitty and the Hive inflation pool isn't nearly enough to do similar. It happens organically here, with people who join in and start to create, consume, invest, powerup and *engage.* It happens at the community level, not at the economic level, even though a lot of the community activities center around the economic mechanisms. 

In time, when there is a more concerted push into Web3, more people will arrive at Hive, but there will be a lot of rivals too. However, it isn't about beating the rivals, it is about becoming a place where value is part of the community, not numbers of clicks - otherwise, we end up like the centralized platforms, beholden to advertisers. 

And, while there is more direct value on content on Patreon for example, we also have the value of decentralization, where people actually own their accounts and if they set up their business on Hive, they can earn outside of the inflation pool, without fear of being cancelled. It is a *massive* advantage, yet it isn't apparent why to many people yet - But I think in time it will be more so. 

>Ah shit.

I wasn't going to write this much and I had no plans on writing about Hive at all, but that is where it has kind of ended up. For me though, this isn't about Hive directly, it is about how we create the world in which we live, through the support we give. The concentration of attention has created this massive disparity in wealth and life outcomes. Had we changed how we support in the past, we would be somewhere different today.

>Law of Supply and Demand.

But, is it too late to change? Perhaps it is - maybe there is no better possible in this world, so we may as well throw our hands up in the air and indulge ourselves, rather than improve ourselves. 

We can use AI to create our content, but the output is a consolidation, are regression to the mean. The more we use it, the more it consolidates and the more average it becomes until, it is right there, *stuck in the middle with you.*

>Well by then, much better than you.

But still in the middle.

Lies are always convenient. 
It is the truth that is uncomfortable.

>I can't do better.

>I can do better.

Which statement is more convenient for you?

Taraz
[ Gen1: Hive ]



</div>

Posted Using [LeoFinance Alpha](https://leofinance.io/@tarazkp/the-convenient-lie)