5 ms·

Ignoring the companies that onboard almost all new users and process transactions for most merchants sounds like a bad idea. But whatever, it's clear at this po

by natrius 11y ago

Ignoring the companies that onboard almost all new users and process transactions for most merchants sounds like a bad idea. But whatever, it's clear at this point that Ethereum will be how most people interact with blockchains for the first time. Anyone who wants to ignore the drama should pick up the docs and start building cool stuff with us.

kang 11y ago
Yes majority is not always right. Ethereum has no solutions for this 'drama' of decentralization & governance either.
- natrius 11y ago
  I think it has pretty good solutions for those, but that's not the point. Blockchains are viewed as a way to make money from speculation, which is why the Bitcoin community is freaking out. Blockchains are actually a revolutionary technology for empowering users with applications they control. If Ethereum had the same sort of governance issue, it wouldn't matter. All of us developers would move our apps to whichever chain ends up being stable, because they'll all support the EVM our apps run on. Ignore the speculation and build cool stuff.
  - kang 11y ago
    Yes, but since no chain is 'stable' or has solutions for these issues, a developer should spend time building apps on their own blockchains which takes just minutes to make.
    - natrius 11y ago
      That's exactly what I do, and that's what I'm suggesting. Developers should read the docs, spin up a chain on their laptops, and build cool stuff.
maaku 11y ago
The goal is not mass adoption. The goal is nonpolitical money.
- natrius 11y ago
  Blockchains are a liberating technology, and I want liberty for the people. I want the network effect of decentralized identities to suck in as many applications as possible and liberate their users. My goal is mass adoption. Money is inherently political. The ease of creating viable competing currencies will constrain the politics, but it can never eliminate it.
- smacktoward 11y ago
  And yet all the difficulties cited in the linked article are political difficulties. Anytime you put three or more people in a room together, you get politics.

by natrius 11y ago

kang 11y ago

Yes majority is not always right. Ethereum has no solutions for this 'drama' of decentralization & governance either.

natrius 11y ago
I think it has pretty good solutions for those, but that's not the point. Blockchains are viewed as a way to make money from speculation, which is why the Bitcoin community is freaking out. Blockchains are actually a revolutionary technology for empowering users with applications they control. If Ethereum had the same sort of governance issue, it wouldn't matter. All of us developers would move our apps to whichever chain ends up being stable, because they'll all support the EVM our apps run on. Ignore the speculation and build cool stuff.
- kang 11y ago
  Yes, but since no chain is 'stable' or has solutions for these issues, a developer should spend time building apps on their own blockchains which takes just minutes to make.
  - natrius 11y ago
    That's exactly what I do, and that's what I'm suggesting. Developers should read the docs, spin up a chain on their laptops, and build cool stuff.

maaku 11y ago

The goal is not mass adoption. The goal is nonpolitical money.

natrius 11y ago
Blockchains are a liberating technology, and I want liberty for the people. I want the network effect of decentralized identities to suck in as many applications as possible and liberate their users. My goal is mass adoption. Money is inherently political. The ease of creating viable competing currencies will constrain the politics, but it can never eliminate it.
smacktoward 11y ago
And yet all the difficulties cited in the linked article are political difficulties. Anytime you put three or more people in a room together, you get politics.