7 ms·

All those things will never break among the common folk. The common folk wants ease of use above anything else. It has to be as easy as sending money via paypa

All those things will never break among the common folk. The common folk wants ease of use above anything else. It has to be as easy as sending money via paypal. No doubt ETH can be the base of that technically, but the model which has ETH holders make money off the appreciation of the ETH token in the process is flawed. Fortune500 and even startups who'd use the open source ETH blockchain technology to bring many services to the common folk won't ever accept to pay a huge cut to parasitic behavior such as to those hodling or staking. Also nobody ever mentions how the ETH blockchain is opensource. If a startup of a fortune500 wants to do something about it they have a big chuck of the development cost eliminated just by forking off the ETH blockchain. This is great! But just like Android doesn't owe Linus anything, so those companies will owe nothing to the stakers and the ETH holders. So to summarize, if you want to build something go to Zug, find Vitalik and give him a big kiss because he saved you a lot of money, at the same time show the middle finger to hodlers and stakers on your way out. On the other hand...if you want to have a shot at getting rich without doing any work...buy deflationary crypto such as king BTC and watch it appreciate vs the dollar....and it will because people are scared as hell about inflation (regardless of the merit of such scare), and everybody is scared about it...from the common person at the supermarket to Stanley Druckenmiller

whitepaint 5y ago
> All those things will never break among the common folk. You should google "NFT".
- pjc50 5y ago
  Not exactly broken among the common folk, although there is a sudden wave of artists chasing whale money.
- ObserverNeutral 5y ago
  What stops Spotify or Sotheby or any other proper company from forking off the ETH blockchain and sell NFT as a service? Nothing..they won't even have to pay because the project is opensource. They can solely focus on ease of use and marketing which is what proper companies do best and just take the technical part without any compensation. This is also the reason why Larry Page is among the richest men in the world and Linux' Linus is a nobody who is only known and relevant among nerds
  - whitepaint 5y ago
    > What stops Spotify or Sotheby or any other proper company from forking off the ETH blockchain and sell NFT as a service? It's as saying if Facebook released all of its code then suddenly it would get competition. It wouldn't. There's the whole infrastructure behind it: thousands of nodes running the blockchain, thousands of applications running on it, developers in this sphere are very scarce because it's so complicated. If you wanted to try to create yet another "Ethereum killer", you would also need to convince developers to write apps on your chain, and people to run the nodes. By the way, to say that Linus Torvalds is a nobody is a ridiculous thing. His net worth is humongous to begin with.
    - ObserverNeutral 5y ago
      > There's the whole infrastructure behind it: thousands of nodes running the blockchain, thousands of applications running on it, developers in this sphere are very scarce because it's so complicated. If you wanted to try to create yet another "Ethereum killer", you would also need to convince developers to write apps on your chain, and people to run the nodes. Are those things really needed to ...you know commercially sell the product to the public, give them ease of use and make money in the process? Because if we must ride the blockchain thing for Venture Capital funding or to look hip among the public on twitter...well we can stick an ethereum logo on it and invite Vitalik to the company podcast. It's much easier and accomplishes the goal in much more straightforward manner.
      - whitepaint 5y ago
        Of course you can do the Binance thingy (copy of Ethereum and have complete centralization). I don't believe that will prevail in the long term. Decentralization is a must.
meowkit 5y ago
A regular centralized company wouldn't want to necessarily use the ETH blockchain. They would use a private blockchain for internal auditing or supply chain partnerships, and would probably build it on something like HyperLedger https://www.hyperledger.org/use/fabric https://www.hyperledger.org/use/fabric (What?! The Linux Foundation??). Binance did fork ETH and has built out the Binance Smart Chain. Problem is that is still centralized. The unresolved debate is whether its the code or the network effects that matter. Oh by the way: Bitcoin is open sourced too. Here's the link! https://github.com/bitcoin https://github.com/bitcoin
- XorNot 5y ago
  Why would any company build a private blockchain? Private companies have top to bottom control of their systems, which means they don't need proof of work or proof of stake or any other system to establish trust: they can just issue PKI keys to employees from a database. Private blockchain has never made any sense: you just give all your employees private keys and move on with your life. EDIT: Which is to say, I'm sure a lot of people are saying they're doing it, and it is yet to be for anything more then to say "we're doing blockchain" to investors and the public. EDIT 2: Reading through the Hyperledger case studies seems to bare this out as well - the implementations are comparatively small, and keep desperately asking the question "was blockchain vital to any of this, or was the actual innovation you just finally automated something into a database?"
  - meowkit 5y ago
    Clearly we have different interpretations of the case studies. Walmart seems interested. But I guess its all just buzzwords and speculation! All these people wasting their time on something so obviously useless. You should let them know!!
    - XorNot 5y ago
      Walmart have literally thousands if not tens of thousands of product lines, but after an initial study are not using their hyperledger implementation for more then 25 according to the website. But that's not the real problem: the real problem is, how can blockchain contribute anything to this problem for them? The process of validating the origin of goods depends on remotely uploading certificates of authenticity - an artifact produced off-chain. From that point on, nothing else matters - since it all depends on whether that certificate is legitimate, trust is external to the chain. The rest does not require "blockchain" at all and is actively made more difficult by it - since every other step is just regular logistics tracking, something Walmart is very good at. Again: what possible benefit is blockchain bringing here? The original artifact is off chain, the goods in question are offchain and the cited benefit is not "improved security" -- it's "quicker look ups". But...that would've been achieved by just scanning barcode numbers into a database at every location (which again: is trust, it's not a fact which is established on-chain). So yes, I do believe people are wasting their time on something obviously useless - IBM was involved and their biggest contribution to my country was to call 25 million people logging on to do a census on one night a denial of service attack. Walmart executives aren't technical - they need to know "what the blockchain could do" and IBM sells them some snakeoil.
mettamage 5y ago
> All those things will never break among the common folk. To be fair, when I was a 10 year old kid in the nineties, I'd never ever suspect that everyone and their grandma* would be so internet savvy as they are. * Obviously not all grandparents ;-) But I've seen quite a few grandparents of whom I'd never suspect to use internet services like WhatsApp.
tim333 5y ago
>All those things will never break among the common folk. The common folk wants ease of use above anything else In my experience the common folk want number go up above anything else.
Tangokat 5y ago
"All those things will never break among the common folk." Just like normal folk will never use TCP/IP, know HTML etc? Nobody needs to know that something runs on a blockchain or how NFTs work. Yes you need to know now but in 10 years my mum will use these things without having any idea what they are. Same as she's using an ipad now without knowing objective C or any underlying protocols and tech.
- ObserverNeutral 5y ago
  > Yes you need to know now but in 10 years my mum will use these things without having any idea what they are Sure but she will use the Spotify app or the Sotheby app to buy NFTs Spotify and Sotheby on the other hand they will not even use a blockchain. Just like Coinbase doesn't use a blockchain This whole decentralization mania solely work when people are are terribly scared of something: Government diluting their purchasing power via printing money and inflation. That's a really deeply rooted thing in our brain as governments did that since the stone age. That's the only killer app of decentralization. As shown by the marketcap of king BTC and the success of exchanges like Coinbase and Binance. NFTs, DeFi...all the other stuff...the user doesn't hate Spotify or Sotheby or the Google Store , but let's say for a moment that it does..well even if the ease of use and fees of DeFi were on par with legacy companies (they are not)...the consumer will always keep using the legacy company product and ask the government to tax them more. So they'd have the best of both worlds: a functioning product and a way to express their hatred
  - Tangokat 5y ago
    I disagree. Decentralization makes it possible to cut out the middle man, Sotheby is no longer needed to do art deals, you can buy directly via smart contract. Will some people buy via Sotheby's still because they provide value in curating items? Sure but they will have much more competition than they do now. It also makes new things possible, for instance the original artist could get a cut of every resale of his art. People can own parts of art, music etc. Artists can go directly to their fans. Another example is Defi which also cuts out the middleman. I want to send you 100 usd. I have euro, right now I need to go to my bank app and they will convert for a pretty big fee , they will also take 5 days to send it to you if it's international and god help me if there are holidays involved. With defi I send instantly and I will be able to choose what kind of value I send and you will be able to choose what kind of value you want to receive. I don't even need to know. I could send you euros and you receive in usd, it passes through a defi smart contract on the way without any of us knowing. If I'm a farmer and I have corn futures I could probably pay in that and you would still just get usd. Again cuts out the middleman. Does it help that it's also censorship resistant and trustless? Yes. The ease of use is not on par with legacy for my mum.. yet. But that was also the case in 1995 with the internet.

whitepaint 5y ago

> All those things will never break among the common folk. You should google "NFT".

pjc50 5y ago
Not exactly broken among the common folk, although there is a sudden wave of artists chasing whale money.
ObserverNeutral 5y ago
What stops Spotify or Sotheby or any other proper company from forking off the ETH blockchain and sell NFT as a service? Nothing..they won't even have to pay because the project is opensource. They can solely focus on ease of use and marketing which is what proper companies do best and just take the technical part without any compensation. This is also the reason why Larry Page is among the richest men in the world and Linux' Linus is a nobody who is only known and relevant among nerds
- whitepaint 5y ago
  > What stops Spotify or Sotheby or any other proper company from forking off the ETH blockchain and sell NFT as a service? It's as saying if Facebook released all of its code then suddenly it would get competition. It wouldn't. There's the whole infrastructure behind it: thousands of nodes running the blockchain, thousands of applications running on it, developers in this sphere are very scarce because it's so complicated. If you wanted to try to create yet another "Ethereum killer", you would also need to convince developers to write apps on your chain, and people to run the nodes. By the way, to say that Linus Torvalds is a nobody is a ridiculous thing. His net worth is humongous to begin with.
  - ObserverNeutral 5y ago
    > There's the whole infrastructure behind it: thousands of nodes running the blockchain, thousands of applications running on it, developers in this sphere are very scarce because it's so complicated. If you wanted to try to create yet another "Ethereum killer", you would also need to convince developers to write apps on your chain, and people to run the nodes. Are those things really needed to ...you know commercially sell the product to the public, give them ease of use and make money in the process? Because if we must ride the blockchain thing for Venture Capital funding or to look hip among the public on twitter...well we can stick an ethereum logo on it and invite Vitalik to the company podcast. It's much easier and accomplishes the goal in much more straightforward manner.
    - whitepaint 5y ago
      Of course you can do the Binance thingy (copy of Ethereum and have complete centralization). I don't believe that will prevail in the long term. Decentralization is a must.

meowkit 5y ago

A regular centralized company wouldn't want to necessarily use the ETH blockchain. They would use a private blockchain for internal auditing or supply chain partnerships, and would probably build it on something like HyperLedger https://www.hyperledger.org/use/fabric https://www.hyperledger.org/use/fabric (What?! The Linux Foundation??). Binance did fork ETH and has built out the Binance Smart Chain. Problem is that is still centralized. The unresolved debate is whether its the code or the network effects that matter. Oh by the way: Bitcoin is open sourced too. Here's the link! https://github.com/bitcoin https://github.com/bitcoin

XorNot 5y ago
Why would any company build a private blockchain? Private companies have top to bottom control of their systems, which means they don't need proof of work or proof of stake or any other system to establish trust: they can just issue PKI keys to employees from a database. Private blockchain has never made any sense: you just give all your employees private keys and move on with your life. EDIT: Which is to say, I'm sure a lot of people are saying they're doing it, and it is yet to be for anything more then to say "we're doing blockchain" to investors and the public. EDIT 2: Reading through the Hyperledger case studies seems to bare this out as well - the implementations are comparatively small, and keep desperately asking the question "was blockchain vital to any of this, or was the actual innovation you just finally automated something into a database?"
- meowkit 5y ago
  Clearly we have different interpretations of the case studies. Walmart seems interested. But I guess its all just buzzwords and speculation! All these people wasting their time on something so obviously useless. You should let them know!!
  - XorNot 5y ago
    Walmart have literally thousands if not tens of thousands of product lines, but after an initial study are not using their hyperledger implementation for more then 25 according to the website. But that's not the real problem: the real problem is, how can blockchain contribute anything to this problem for them? The process of validating the origin of goods depends on remotely uploading certificates of authenticity - an artifact produced off-chain. From that point on, nothing else matters - since it all depends on whether that certificate is legitimate, trust is external to the chain. The rest does not require "blockchain" at all and is actively made more difficult by it - since every other step is just regular logistics tracking, something Walmart is very good at. Again: what possible benefit is blockchain bringing here? The original artifact is off chain, the goods in question are offchain and the cited benefit is not "improved security" -- it's "quicker look ups". But...that would've been achieved by just scanning barcode numbers into a database at every location (which again: is trust, it's not a fact which is established on-chain). So yes, I do believe people are wasting their time on something obviously useless - IBM was involved and their biggest contribution to my country was to call 25 million people logging on to do a census on one night a denial of service attack. Walmart executives aren't technical - they need to know "what the blockchain could do" and IBM sells them some snakeoil.

mettamage 5y ago

> All those things will never break among the common folk. To be fair, when I was a 10 year old kid in the nineties, I'd never ever suspect that everyone and their grandma* would be so internet savvy as they are. * Obviously not all grandparents ;-) But I've seen quite a few grandparents of whom I'd never suspect to use internet services like WhatsApp.

tim333 5y ago

>All those things will never break among the common folk. The common folk wants ease of use above anything else In my experience the common folk want number go up above anything else.

Tangokat 5y ago

"All those things will never break among the common folk." Just like normal folk will never use TCP/IP, know HTML etc? Nobody needs to know that something runs on a blockchain or how NFTs work. Yes you need to know now but in 10 years my mum will use these things without having any idea what they are. Same as she's using an ipad now without knowing objective C or any underlying protocols and tech.

ObserverNeutral 5y ago
> Yes you need to know now but in 10 years my mum will use these things without having any idea what they are Sure but she will use the Spotify app or the Sotheby app to buy NFTs Spotify and Sotheby on the other hand they will not even use a blockchain. Just like Coinbase doesn't use a blockchain This whole decentralization mania solely work when people are are terribly scared of something: Government diluting their purchasing power via printing money and inflation. That's a really deeply rooted thing in our brain as governments did that since the stone age. That's the only killer app of decentralization. As shown by the marketcap of king BTC and the success of exchanges like Coinbase and Binance. NFTs, DeFi...all the other stuff...the user doesn't hate Spotify or Sotheby or the Google Store , but let's say for a moment that it does..well even if the ease of use and fees of DeFi were on par with legacy companies (they are not)...the consumer will always keep using the legacy company product and ask the government to tax them more. So they'd have the best of both worlds: a functioning product and a way to express their hatred
- Tangokat 5y ago
  I disagree. Decentralization makes it possible to cut out the middle man, Sotheby is no longer needed to do art deals, you can buy directly via smart contract. Will some people buy via Sotheby's still because they provide value in curating items? Sure but they will have much more competition than they do now. It also makes new things possible, for instance the original artist could get a cut of every resale of his art. People can own parts of art, music etc. Artists can go directly to their fans. Another example is Defi which also cuts out the middleman. I want to send you 100 usd. I have euro, right now I need to go to my bank app and they will convert for a pretty big fee , they will also take 5 days to send it to you if it's international and god help me if there are holidays involved. With defi I send instantly and I will be able to choose what kind of value I send and you will be able to choose what kind of value you want to receive. I don't even need to know. I could send you euros and you receive in usd, it passes through a defi smart contract on the way without any of us knowing. If I'm a farmer and I have corn futures I could probably pay in that and you would still just get usd. Again cuts out the middleman. Does it help that it's also censorship resistant and trustless? Yes. The ease of use is not on par with legacy for my mum.. yet. But that was also the case in 1995 with the internet.