5 ms·

The author fails to mention a likely outcome: the co-mingling of centralized solutions and decentralized ones. Decentralized solutions would be at global scale

The author fails to mention a likely outcome: the co-mingling of centralized solutions and decentralized ones. Decentralized solutions would be at global scale (not at 2% usage) and they'd complement centralized solutions, not replace. For example, digital property rights might be best preserved via decentralized tech. But perhaps you might take your digital property and use it to interact with centralized services. Imagine a video game where the player truly owns the in-game items they use as crypto tokens, but the game itself runs on centralized servers. The same might be said of Facebook-like applications. Rather than imagining a future where a decentralized Facebook exists, perhaps it becomes more of a hybrid decentralized-centralized platform.

paulgb 8y ago
> Imagine a video game where the player truly owns the in-game items they use as crypto tokens, but the game itself runs on centralized servers. This is a neat thought experiment, but beyond the novelty what value does it give you to own an item in a decentralized way if a centralized entity can take it away from you if they want to (even if it means patching the game instead of knowing your private key?) Truly decentralized, Sybil-resistant networks are necessarily expensive to maintain, so it has to provide more than just novelty value.
- Vadoff 8y ago
  The value of the decentralized token would be determined by the free market. If the centralized entity ever had a history of patching the game to block tokens, then the value of that token would go down a lot.
  - theamk 8y ago
    But if the value is determined by a single centralized entity, what is the value that crypto tokens bring? For example, if WOW currency were to become decentralized overnight -- what would practically change? Either way Blizzard can take them away. Either way value of token will drop if Blizzard does this a lot.
    - woah 8y ago
      A game accepting the token would be able to get an instant potential audience of people who had built up a lot of value in it already
      - vertex-four 8y ago
        So this sounds like a good reason for game developers not to use decentralised currencies, since it makes it easier for competitors to steal players away.
        miscreanity 8y ago
        While not participating means no "real world" money involved and an uphill battle for adoption. The game would have to be an outstanding gem, and even then markets will form. Would it be worthwhile for a game developer to spend time on an economic system, or the game? Unless the game is an economic system...
        vertex-four 8y ago
        Generally speaking, game developers need to create and maintain "fixed" economic systems to make the game fun. Games regularly suffer from ridiculous economic effects because it's too easy to get money and not enough sinks, or vice versa. Making the tokens tradeable outside the game doesn't fix this, and in fact creates even more problems - the presence of gold farmers and those who pay them can unbalance the game for others playing the game with them. People spend their lives struggling under capitalism and use games to escape - and then you want to create a capitalist class system there too?
        miscreanity 8y ago
        You can try to stop it, but that never works in the long run. Ever. If there's going to be a social element, it will be exploited to the game's level of popularity. That isn't to say a game can't remain closed and private with a simplistic model, just that popularity will generally weaken whatever community aspects made it great early on.
- tim333 8y ago
  We kind of have that situation with crypto kitties - you own a number representing the cat but the image is rendered on a centralised server. I guess if they shut / patched the server people could write / fork a new one. It's a funny business based on perceptions of what things are worth like art.

paulgb 8y ago

> Imagine a video game where the player truly owns the in-game items they use as crypto tokens, but the game itself runs on centralized servers. This is a neat thought experiment, but beyond the novelty what value does it give you to own an item in a decentralized way if a centralized entity can take it away from you if they want to (even if it means patching the game instead of knowing your private key?) Truly decentralized, Sybil-resistant networks are necessarily expensive to maintain, so it has to provide more than just novelty value.

Vadoff 8y ago
The value of the decentralized token would be determined by the free market. If the centralized entity ever had a history of patching the game to block tokens, then the value of that token would go down a lot.
- theamk 8y ago
  But if the value is determined by a single centralized entity, what is the value that crypto tokens bring? For example, if WOW currency were to become decentralized overnight -- what would practically change? Either way Blizzard can take them away. Either way value of token will drop if Blizzard does this a lot.
  - woah 8y ago
    A game accepting the token would be able to get an instant potential audience of people who had built up a lot of value in it already
    - vertex-four 8y ago
      So this sounds like a good reason for game developers not to use decentralised currencies, since it makes it easier for competitors to steal players away.
      - miscreanity 8y ago
        While not participating means no "real world" money involved and an uphill battle for adoption. The game would have to be an outstanding gem, and even then markets will form. Would it be worthwhile for a game developer to spend time on an economic system, or the game? Unless the game is an economic system...
        vertex-four 8y ago
        Generally speaking, game developers need to create and maintain "fixed" economic systems to make the game fun. Games regularly suffer from ridiculous economic effects because it's too easy to get money and not enough sinks, or vice versa. Making the tokens tradeable outside the game doesn't fix this, and in fact creates even more problems - the presence of gold farmers and those who pay them can unbalance the game for others playing the game with them. People spend their lives struggling under capitalism and use games to escape - and then you want to create a capitalist class system there too?
        miscreanity 8y ago
        You can try to stop it, but that never works in the long run. Ever. If there's going to be a social element, it will be exploited to the game's level of popularity. That isn't to say a game can't remain closed and private with a simplistic model, just that popularity will generally weaken whatever community aspects made it great early on.
tim333 8y ago
We kind of have that situation with crypto kitties - you own a number representing the cat but the image is rendered on a centralised server. I guess if they shut / patched the server people could write / fork a new one. It's a funny business based on perceptions of what things are worth like art.