4 ms·

Why is adding an incentive mechanism to "pinning" files on IPFS inherently wrong? If you find the right incentives to a tech problem, that pushes the tech forwa

by asenna 6y ago

Why is adding an incentive mechanism to "pinning" files on IPFS inherently wrong? If you find the right incentives to a tech problem, that pushes the tech forward right? Like Satoshi Nakomoto putting together the right type of incentive to be able to create an almost unhackable network in Bitcoin (along with Ethereum and others). I'm not yet saying that Protocol Labs will ultimately find the success they're looking for BUT writing off their efforts as "just a way to make money off of cryptocurrency" I feel is pretty dismissive.

rglullis 6y ago
It's not dismissive. They already got their money. $257 million, to be exact. No one knows how Filecoin is going to make money except for Protocol Labs.
- cachvico 6y ago
  By providing value, therefore driving up the market price of the integral reward. Currently at $22, not bad for a random coin. I.e, the value of the coin is driven by the interest in the tech it provides.
  - rglullis 6y ago
    That's a very hand-wavy answer, no? "The market price of the integral reward"? What is that supposed to mean? Filecoin is just a medium of exchange for people buying and selling storage services. Filecoin does not offer anything specific and its platform has to compete with plenty of mature, efficient alternatives. > the value of the coin is driven by the interest in the tech it provides. What "tech" does it provide? Not IPFS, for sure, that already was under development and could have come to fruition as a regular open source project. A decentralized market for storage, "proof-of-spacetime"? These might be interesting. But again, if we want to fund these things there are surely better/cheaper ways to do it. $250 million is a lot of money for the tech that was developed so far. More importantly: there is nothing about the "tech" that requires $FIL to make it work. The market dynamics will be the same whether they used FIL, DAI, ETH, wrapped BTC or even a dollar-pegged token they decided to issue. People are not going to pay more or less for their storage because the price of the token went up or down. > Currently at $22, not bad for a random coin. These are the kind of statements that almost make me side with the buttcoiners. At this point, with all the speculation, market manipulation and naive FOMO "investing", there is no useful information to be had from the price of the token.
geofft 6y ago
I don't think the claim is that it's wrong, I think it's just trying to answer "Why do people constantly have to re-invent the wheel? :(". "X but we monetized it" (which includes "X but we got VCs to pay us") is an extremely common reason to reinvent X.

by asenna 6y ago

rglullis 6y ago

It's not dismissive. They already got their money. $257 million, to be exact. No one knows how Filecoin is going to make money except for Protocol Labs.

cachvico 6y ago
By providing value, therefore driving up the market price of the integral reward. Currently at $22, not bad for a random coin. I.e, the value of the coin is driven by the interest in the tech it provides.
- rglullis 6y ago
  That's a very hand-wavy answer, no? "The market price of the integral reward"? What is that supposed to mean? Filecoin is just a medium of exchange for people buying and selling storage services. Filecoin does not offer anything specific and its platform has to compete with plenty of mature, efficient alternatives. > the value of the coin is driven by the interest in the tech it provides. What "tech" does it provide? Not IPFS, for sure, that already was under development and could have come to fruition as a regular open source project. A decentralized market for storage, "proof-of-spacetime"? These might be interesting. But again, if we want to fund these things there are surely better/cheaper ways to do it. $250 million is a lot of money for the tech that was developed so far. More importantly: there is nothing about the "tech" that requires $FIL to make it work. The market dynamics will be the same whether they used FIL, DAI, ETH, wrapped BTC or even a dollar-pegged token they decided to issue. People are not going to pay more or less for their storage because the price of the token went up or down. > Currently at $22, not bad for a random coin. These are the kind of statements that almost make me side with the buttcoiners. At this point, with all the speculation, market manipulation and naive FOMO "investing", there is no useful information to be had from the price of the token.

geofft 6y ago

I don't think the claim is that it's wrong, I think it's just trying to answer "Why do people constantly have to re-invent the wheel? :(". "X but we monetized it" (which includes "X but we got VCs to pay us") is an extremely common reason to reinvent X.