3 ms·

This article has elements of insight, but it seems oblivious to the main direction of causality. What drives technology is stuff people want. In that context

by CPLX 8y ago

This article has elements of insight, but it seems oblivious to the main direction of causality. What drives technology is stuff people want. In that context apps are infrastructure too. I want to tell people something, so the app email helps me. And the infrastructure TCP/IP helps email. But from my perspective “I want to tell Dan the meeting changed” it’s all just infrastructure, a way to solve that problem. The article implies that the infrastructure is like sitting there waiting for apps. But apps don’t just stroll along into the story. Apps come from needs. People have a need for a way to send money for illegal stuff, and a need/desire for a medium of gambling. Crypto has risen to meet those needs. Unless there are other demonstrated needs that blockchain solves there aren’t going to be more apps, or more anything.

TheCoelacanth 8y ago
Did we read the same article? I got exactly the opposite point from the article: that apps preceed infrastructure, e.g. light bulbs came before the electric grid and airplanes came before airports. The apps are made better by the infrastructure but are still useful without it. That infrastructure supports new apps that wouldn't be useful without the infrastructure, but the infrastructure is always built for the previous apps, not the new ones it will make possible.
- CPLX 8y ago
  Yes I got that part. The problem is that the electric grid doesn’t come from lightbulbs. They both come from people wanting to do stuff in the dark. Airplanes and airports come from people wanting to get places faster. The whole concept of the article is still backwards, it’s still trying to rationalize why there have to be blockchain apps and infrastructure. There doesn’t.
antpls 8y ago
> People have a need for a way to send money for illegal stuff, and a need/desire for a medium of gambling. Crypto has risen to meet those needs. > Unless there are other demonstrated needs that blockchain solves there aren’t going to be more apps, or more anything. I agree with you that apps are driven by "needs". However, we should also keep in mind all needs aren't driven by rational cost analysis. If a new technology potentially allows for a major shift of the centers of power and trust, then the needs are difficult to appreciate at first hand. Your needs may be different than someone else needs, a group's needs may be different that another group's needs, etc. Needs may conflicts, or it may happen that you don't understand some people's needs. We should take into account the interests of the actors of the system too. We can imagine two currency systems, or two internets, coexisting together. What's matter is that everyone's needs are fulfilled, without one specific camp exploiting the others. Diversity is a force, there is no reason to not let people claim or experiment with new ideas, as long as it's fair to everyone. But I also think everyone is getting a bit tired of the marketing around crypto and blockchains. Yes it's probably useful, but no, it won't solve everyone's problems.
iamwil 8y ago
> Unless there are other demonstrated needs that blockchain solves there aren’t going to be more apps, or more anything. I hear this line often. As an aside, I'll just share some of the things I've seen so far. 1) International payments. There are countries where the domestic market isn't big enough, so once they expand, they quickly end up doing business with foreign companies, or hire people in foreign countries. Banks in different countries are unlikely to have a direct connection to each other. So they have to route through ones they do have a relationship--typically bigger banks. This process can take weeks, and can throw off the cadence of your people getting paid. Cryptocurrencies reduces international payments down from weeks to a couple minutes/hours. 2) Store of value in a country with runaway inflation. Venezuela has been the poster-child for this need, as its fiat has been inflating to the point where it's nearly worthless. The country doesn't allow people to leave, and makes it difficult to trade for other currencies. Hence, people there are using Bitcoin to store the value they have left. 3) Ownable and composable collectible card game assets. Cryptokitty is the poster child, but also check out Gods Unchained and Zombie Battleground. These are CCGs where the game makers can't nerf the cards you own. Not sure how they'd rebalance the game, but actually owning your digital stuff has emotional appeal to players. The other interesting thing here is that any game can build on top of these assets to make other games. That means you can move your digital stuff from game to game. Just like the early internet, most of the early applications are for the ecosystem itself. Stablecoins, decentralized exchanges, different wallets, custodial solutions, token trackers, etc. These are unlikely to be useful to you unless you already believe cryptocurrencies have value. So that means the number of things you believe are useful built on top of it is small, and most early applications are hidden from you. >The article implies that the infrastructure is like sitting there waiting for apps. As for what the article implies, I didn't get that read. When I build apps, I also have needs that arise that I wish someone else built the infrastructure for. The common thing I run up against is that I wish I had a easy-to-setup data pipeline with resilience, reproducibility, and observeability. Apps inspire need for infrastructure, just as infrastructure inspires apps. In an infrastructure sense, I view cryptocurrencies as a settlement network of transferable value.

by CPLX 8y ago

TheCoelacanth 8y ago

Did we read the same article? I got exactly the opposite point from the article: that apps preceed infrastructure, e.g. light bulbs came before the electric grid and airplanes came before airports. The apps are made better by the infrastructure but are still useful without it. That infrastructure supports new apps that wouldn't be useful without the infrastructure, but the infrastructure is always built for the previous apps, not the new ones it will make possible.

CPLX 8y ago
Yes I got that part. The problem is that the electric grid doesn’t come from lightbulbs. They both come from people wanting to do stuff in the dark. Airplanes and airports come from people wanting to get places faster. The whole concept of the article is still backwards, it’s still trying to rationalize why there have to be blockchain apps and infrastructure. There doesn’t.

antpls 8y ago

> People have a need for a way to send money for illegal stuff, and a need/desire for a medium of gambling. Crypto has risen to meet those needs. > Unless there are other demonstrated needs that blockchain solves there aren’t going to be more apps, or more anything. I agree with you that apps are driven by "needs". However, we should also keep in mind all needs aren't driven by rational cost analysis. If a new technology potentially allows for a major shift of the centers of power and trust, then the needs are difficult to appreciate at first hand. Your needs may be different than someone else needs, a group's needs may be different that another group's needs, etc. Needs may conflicts, or it may happen that you don't understand some people's needs. We should take into account the interests of the actors of the system too. We can imagine two currency systems, or two internets, coexisting together. What's matter is that everyone's needs are fulfilled, without one specific camp exploiting the others. Diversity is a force, there is no reason to not let people claim or experiment with new ideas, as long as it's fair to everyone. But I also think everyone is getting a bit tired of the marketing around crypto and blockchains. Yes it's probably useful, but no, it won't solve everyone's problems.

iamwil 8y ago

> Unless there are other demonstrated needs that blockchain solves there aren’t going to be more apps, or more anything. I hear this line often. As an aside, I'll just share some of the things I've seen so far. 1) International payments. There are countries where the domestic market isn't big enough, so once they expand, they quickly end up doing business with foreign companies, or hire people in foreign countries. Banks in different countries are unlikely to have a direct connection to each other. So they have to route through ones they do have a relationship--typically bigger banks. This process can take weeks, and can throw off the cadence of your people getting paid. Cryptocurrencies reduces international payments down from weeks to a couple minutes/hours. 2) Store of value in a country with runaway inflation. Venezuela has been the poster-child for this need, as its fiat has been inflating to the point where it's nearly worthless. The country doesn't allow people to leave, and makes it difficult to trade for other currencies. Hence, people there are using Bitcoin to store the value they have left. 3) Ownable and composable collectible card game assets. Cryptokitty is the poster child, but also check out Gods Unchained and Zombie Battleground. These are CCGs where the game makers can't nerf the cards you own. Not sure how they'd rebalance the game, but actually owning your digital stuff has emotional appeal to players. The other interesting thing here is that any game can build on top of these assets to make other games. That means you can move your digital stuff from game to game. Just like the early internet, most of the early applications are for the ecosystem itself. Stablecoins, decentralized exchanges, different wallets, custodial solutions, token trackers, etc. These are unlikely to be useful to you unless you already believe cryptocurrencies have value. So that means the number of things you believe are useful built on top of it is small, and most early applications are hidden from you. >The article implies that the infrastructure is like sitting there waiting for apps. As for what the article implies, I didn't get that read. When I build apps, I also have needs that arise that I wish someone else built the infrastructure for. The common thing I run up against is that I wish I had a easy-to-setup data pipeline with resilience, reproducibility, and observeability. Apps inspire need for infrastructure, just as infrastructure inspires apps. In an infrastructure sense, I view cryptocurrencies as a settlement network of transferable value.