Great post Hyung,
So, the bottom line which is to have a designated task force for the Cosmos Hub to drive more utility to ATOM and the Hub is much needed.
This brings me to a point which i want to add to this discussion.
As we know the ICF currently funds primarily everything sorounding the Cosmos ecosystem as a whole. This includes also the Cosmos Hub. The ICF is following the Jae Kwon vision of ultimate transparency especially when it comes to funding new projects. This is quite noble and there many positives because it reflects the open and permissionless ideal of the blockchain space.
Nevertheless, when trying to compete with giants like Binance in order to not only stay relevant but to keep a competative edge it is not always in the best interest to strive for ultimate transparency and in this im referring to open sourcing everything and in regards to the ICF only funding open source projects.
The key here for the hub to be successful is to have a good mix of both. The Cosmos Hub community and ICF need to fund both in order to make the Hub relevant for decades to come.
Now that IBC is coming and the last whitepaper deliverable is close to completion at least 50% of the focus from the ICF, ATOM holders and the AIB may be on the Cosmos Hub.
A distributed internet of blockchain is expanding and the mother GAIA and its native asset ATOM need a key position moving forward. It is not in the interest of ATOM holders to be just another Hub. Added utility needs to come and it needs to come now.