6 ms·

95% of blockchain projects are a garbage heap, crypto currency is WAY overvalued, but the 5% of projects that are actually useful, and have a real need for a bl

95% of blockchain projects are a garbage heap, crypto currency is WAY overvalued, but the 5% of projects that are actually useful, and have a real need for a blockchain may just fundamentally change parts of how we live life when micro transactions as a concept came to games, it changed the way people wrote games. when crowd funding became mainstream, it allowed more innovation from people with just a need and an idea don’t dismiss the 5% useful for the 95% useless (and no, i’m not going to enumerate the useful cases because it’s been done to death) *EDIT: and to be clear, i think the currency part of crypto currency is in the 95% not helpful (maybe unless you’re talking about stellar, which deals more with fiat/other currency exchange and for the most part eschews spending crypto currency itself)

egypturnash 7y ago
> when micro transactions as a concept came to games, it changed the way people wrote games Has there ever actually been a case where microtransactions made for a better game? Everything I've read about what it's like working for studios that rely on them is creepy stories about trying to chase 'whales'.
- aey 7y ago
  How do you objectively measure better besides revenue?
  - root_axis 7y ago
    User feedback.
    - aey 7y ago
      user feedback can be easily gamed and faked. often the loudest voices are the only ones that are heard. Dollars at least have tangible measure. I can't imagine that their users are hate spending money on in game purchases.
- rickycook 7y ago
  I wouldn't say "better"; That's pretty damn hard to substantiate! What's the other option? Well 1 is that the game wouldn't exist. I guarantee that Popcap [1] wouldn't be too happy, and there are plenty of people that get enjoyment from their games (arguably sometimes to an unhealthy degree). If micropayments weren't a thing, then many of their games would likely not exist. [1] https://www.ea.com/studios/popcap/games https://www.ea.com/studios/popcap/games
- Aromasin 7y ago
  If think in some games where cosmetics are the only commodity it works well. In-game customization frankly was not a priority for game-devs, as it did not turn a profit. That is until games like League of Legends et al made customization micro-transactions their entire business model. It's meant newly fantastic support for the art departments! It's also lead to a number of games that are constantly updated over many years instead of just made for release, so one can play their favourite games without them become stale. Yes, this has existed in the form of a subscription service before, but cosmetic micro-transactions have effectively socialised some games, where the whales pay for game development and less wealthy individuals still get to enjoy the game without paying anything! Path of Exile probably wouldn't exist without micro transactions, at least to the popularity it has become, and I've never had to pay a penny to play that game. So there are a few cases. That's not to say that most mobile game micro-transaction models aren't absolute hot, filthy, dirty, disgusting, stinking garbage.
arcticbull 7y ago
> don’t dismiss the 5% useful for the 95% useless (and no, i’m not going to enumerate the useful cases because it’s been done to death) It sounds like you can't point to any, like everyone else who insists there's a 'there' there. Nobody has been able to point to a single, legal, use case where crypto is better than a fiat based technology. Zip. None. But they're all sure it's there. Don't you think with all the interest in the space, if someone had come up with one, it'd be enormous? EOS raised over four BILLION dollars a few years ago and still doesn't have a working blockchain. [1] You can fire up a blockchain in minutes. If there was a company that actually created something of value, it'd be worth more than the mewn y'all are trying to reach. We've been waiting for a decade now, I'm sure OP will deliver /s. [1] https://toshitimes.com/eos-is-not-a-blockchain/ https://toshitimes.com/eos-is-not-a-blockchain/
- lojack 7y ago
  How about real time cross border remittance and settlement? Current fiat approaches require large illiquid reserves, are slow, and not very scalable. It’s also useful for transmitting money long distances when banks won’t do business and you want to avoid a paper trail (drugs). Fiat is perfectly fine for in person transactions, but not when distance is involved. You may or may not morally agree with it, but this is a proven use case.
  - arcticbull 7y ago
    > How about real time cross border remittance and settlement? Current fiat approaches require large illiquid reserves, are slow, and not very scalable. It's bad for that, we've been through this. To send money you have to pay ~1% to an exchange in your home country, wait a few days for it to clear exposing yourself to huge forex risk, pay a $1 transaction fee give or take, then pay ~1% to an exchange in your destination country netting you 3-5 days latency, 2% fee plus $1 plus 10 minutes and incalculable forex risk. And the risk your exchange will literally just steal your money a la Quadriga. Or getting it confiscated en route like the $825M taken from Bitfinex by various government entities for laundering money. There are a lot of solutions to this problem ranging from a credit card to buy things, TransferWise (0.85% fee give or take) to Interactive Brokers ($20 per million fee, or 0.002%) to Norbert's Gambit (free) to a wire transfer if you have to settle instantly. Or even just opening an HSBC account in both countries and moving the money instantly online via web banking. Then there's Square Cash and Venmo for free domestic transfers, the free/instant domestic RTP network in the US, the free/instant SEPA network in Europe and the often free/instant Interac e-Transfer network in Canada. > ...and not very scalable. According to the Bank for International Settlements triennial report of 2016, the foreign exchange market cap averaged $5.1 trillion per day. That's $1,861.5 trillion dollars per year. Forgive me for thinking that means the scaling issue is pretty much solved. It's probably the single most liquid market in the history of the world. > It’s also useful for transmitting money long distances when banks won’t do business and you want to avoid a paper trail (drugs). I did say a legal use case. One that neither violates laws nor sanctions. Worse, Bitcoin leaves you with a paper trail. You'd have to use Zcash or Monero. > Fiat is perfectly fine for in person transactions, but not when distance is involved. You may or may not morally agree with it, but this is a proven use case. It is, though, because you can use your Visa card to send money instantly to anywhere in the world that isn't sanctioned.

egypturnash 7y ago

> when micro transactions as a concept came to games, it changed the way people wrote games Has there ever actually been a case where microtransactions made for a better game? Everything I've read about what it's like working for studios that rely on them is creepy stories about trying to chase 'whales'.

aey 7y ago
How do you objectively measure better besides revenue?
- root_axis 7y ago
  User feedback.
  - aey 7y ago
    user feedback can be easily gamed and faked. often the loudest voices are the only ones that are heard. Dollars at least have tangible measure. I can't imagine that their users are hate spending money on in game purchases.
rickycook 7y ago
I wouldn't say "better"; That's pretty damn hard to substantiate! What's the other option? Well 1 is that the game wouldn't exist. I guarantee that Popcap [1] wouldn't be too happy, and there are plenty of people that get enjoyment from their games (arguably sometimes to an unhealthy degree). If micropayments weren't a thing, then many of their games would likely not exist. [1] https://www.ea.com/studios/popcap/games https://www.ea.com/studios/popcap/games
Aromasin 7y ago
If think in some games where cosmetics are the only commodity it works well. In-game customization frankly was not a priority for game-devs, as it did not turn a profit. That is until games like League of Legends et al made customization micro-transactions their entire business model. It's meant newly fantastic support for the art departments! It's also lead to a number of games that are constantly updated over many years instead of just made for release, so one can play their favourite games without them become stale. Yes, this has existed in the form of a subscription service before, but cosmetic micro-transactions have effectively socialised some games, where the whales pay for game development and less wealthy individuals still get to enjoy the game without paying anything! Path of Exile probably wouldn't exist without micro transactions, at least to the popularity it has become, and I've never had to pay a penny to play that game. So there are a few cases. That's not to say that most mobile game micro-transaction models aren't absolute hot, filthy, dirty, disgusting, stinking garbage.

arcticbull 7y ago

> don’t dismiss the 5% useful for the 95% useless (and no, i’m not going to enumerate the useful cases because it’s been done to death) It sounds like you can't point to any, like everyone else who insists there's a 'there' there. Nobody has been able to point to a single, legal, use case where crypto is better than a fiat based technology. Zip. None. But they're all sure it's there. Don't you think with all the interest in the space, if someone had come up with one, it'd be enormous? EOS raised over four BILLION dollars a few years ago and still doesn't have a working blockchain. [1] You can fire up a blockchain in minutes. If there was a company that actually created something of value, it'd be worth more than the mewn y'all are trying to reach. We've been waiting for a decade now, I'm sure OP will deliver /s. [1] https://toshitimes.com/eos-is-not-a-blockchain/ https://toshitimes.com/eos-is-not-a-blockchain/

lojack 7y ago
How about real time cross border remittance and settlement? Current fiat approaches require large illiquid reserves, are slow, and not very scalable. It’s also useful for transmitting money long distances when banks won’t do business and you want to avoid a paper trail (drugs). Fiat is perfectly fine for in person transactions, but not when distance is involved. You may or may not morally agree with it, but this is a proven use case.
- arcticbull 7y ago
  > How about real time cross border remittance and settlement? Current fiat approaches require large illiquid reserves, are slow, and not very scalable. It's bad for that, we've been through this. To send money you have to pay ~1% to an exchange in your home country, wait a few days for it to clear exposing yourself to huge forex risk, pay a $1 transaction fee give or take, then pay ~1% to an exchange in your destination country netting you 3-5 days latency, 2% fee plus $1 plus 10 minutes and incalculable forex risk. And the risk your exchange will literally just steal your money a la Quadriga. Or getting it confiscated en route like the $825M taken from Bitfinex by various government entities for laundering money. There are a lot of solutions to this problem ranging from a credit card to buy things, TransferWise (0.85% fee give or take) to Interactive Brokers ($20 per million fee, or 0.002%) to Norbert's Gambit (free) to a wire transfer if you have to settle instantly. Or even just opening an HSBC account in both countries and moving the money instantly online via web banking. Then there's Square Cash and Venmo for free domestic transfers, the free/instant domestic RTP network in the US, the free/instant SEPA network in Europe and the often free/instant Interac e-Transfer network in Canada. > ...and not very scalable. According to the Bank for International Settlements triennial report of 2016, the foreign exchange market cap averaged $5.1 trillion per day. That's $1,861.5 trillion dollars per year. Forgive me for thinking that means the scaling issue is pretty much solved. It's probably the single most liquid market in the history of the world. > It’s also useful for transmitting money long distances when banks won’t do business and you want to avoid a paper trail (drugs). I did say a legal use case. One that neither violates laws nor sanctions. Worse, Bitcoin leaves you with a paper trail. You'd have to use Zcash or Monero. > Fiat is perfectly fine for in person transactions, but not when distance is involved. You may or may not morally agree with it, but this is a proven use case. It is, though, because you can use your Visa card to send money instantly to anywhere in the world that isn't sanctioned.