3 ms·

Have you ever seen or heard of anyone pay $1M or $100K for a .com address? Why do they do that when there's like 256 TLDs? Why does anyone pay $20M to live in

Have you ever seen or heard of anyone pay $1M or $100K for a .com address? Why do they do that when there's like 256 TLDs? Why does anyone pay $20M to live in a box in Manhattan when they could buy a huge ranch in Montana and live like a king? Some blockchains are more valuable than others. And their blockspace is limited, just like Manhattan real estate. The reasons for this are numerous, but a big part of it comes down to security and liquidity. If you are going to create a digital agreement, you want a blockchain with a high degree of security and predictability. You also want composability with other applications so you can have access to an ecosystem and other financial services.

dkarras 5y ago
the space of .com addresses are physically limited. the space in manhattan is physically limited. creation of a new cryptocurrency does not have such limits. like everything else digital. it is the same difference between physical goods, and software. software costs zero to copy. physical goods are physically limited. so, with the topic of this post's link - even if someone somewhere perfects the security scheme of a blockchain, in the end it all is futile - because it can be copied. If there is enormous pressure by some powerful entities to an on-chain fork, but it is not feasible because of all the built-in security of the blockchain system and protocol, they can still have enough influence to create a new coin, undermining the "limited" property of the first coin. It is a new brand of coin, operated, mined, minted by mostly different people. The coin has the same features, same security - but liquidity is directly stolen from other coins because we have finite amount of people. Through exchanges, you can exchange them. In the end, when you remove the "get rich quick" scheme, they are all the same, and can be issued infinitely, albeit on different "names". Don't get too hung up on names. You can't tell me "the network is too valuable, it is impossible create additional coins" either because that is what has been happening from the beginning. All those coins, with slightly different features - in the end perhaps one will have it all, but what is the ultimate purpose? Given enough pressure, it can be copied, new "money" can still come into circulation to be used by people that accept it. It is not impossible, it is happening, has always happened since bitcoin. Each dogecoin minted today, affects the value of bitcoin tomorrow.
- qecez 5y ago
  > Each dogecoin minted today, affects the value of bitcoin tomorrow. Dude, same with Montenegro real estate affecting the value of your apartment in Manhattan. > If bitcoin was the only possible cryptocurrency but the hype around cryptocurrencies was the same, a bitcoin would cost substantially more today. Just like if the rest of the land didn't exist, your Manhattan apartment would cost substantially more today.
  - dkarras 5y ago
    I responded to this above but again just for you: land is ALREADY physically limited. the whole /point/ of cryptocurrencies was to provide the same type of scarcity artificially for the digital realm. my point is, the fact that you can create additional coins and split the liquidity between the two means that the task has failed. my further claim is that the even the attempt is futile. academically interesting, practically (for this given purpose) futile.
    - koonsolo 5y ago
      There is still so much open space to build cities, but everyone seems to want to live in the existing ones.
      - dkarras 5y ago
        ...because the existing and established ones have something unique to offer and to copy that would be an enormous (and slow) undertaking (but it is being done, civilization has always been spreading to free areas, it is just slow) - but once you crack open an hassle free secure consensus system (software, not bound by limited physical reality) the old one does not have anything unique to offer for the group of people who are unhappy about who holds the power. If there was an exact replica of Manhattan (or if it was trivial to create it) - and I mean really exact with all the affordances it provides - think of an empty copy of the world, Manhattan is in the same place, but mostly empty (just established), that you can switch to with a keypress (and could switch back and forth) - what would happen?

dkarras 5y ago

the space of .com addresses are physically limited. the space in manhattan is physically limited. creation of a new cryptocurrency does not have such limits. like everything else digital. it is the same difference between physical goods, and software. software costs zero to copy. physical goods are physically limited. so, with the topic of this post's link - even if someone somewhere perfects the security scheme of a blockchain, in the end it all is futile - because it can be copied. If there is enormous pressure by some powerful entities to an on-chain fork, but it is not feasible because of all the built-in security of the blockchain system and protocol, they can still have enough influence to create a new coin, undermining the "limited" property of the first coin. It is a new brand of coin, operated, mined, minted by mostly different people. The coin has the same features, same security - but liquidity is directly stolen from other coins because we have finite amount of people. Through exchanges, you can exchange them. In the end, when you remove the "get rich quick" scheme, they are all the same, and can be issued infinitely, albeit on different "names". Don't get too hung up on names. You can't tell me "the network is too valuable, it is impossible create additional coins" either because that is what has been happening from the beginning. All those coins, with slightly different features - in the end perhaps one will have it all, but what is the ultimate purpose? Given enough pressure, it can be copied, new "money" can still come into circulation to be used by people that accept it. It is not impossible, it is happening, has always happened since bitcoin. Each dogecoin minted today, affects the value of bitcoin tomorrow.

qecez 5y ago
> Each dogecoin minted today, affects the value of bitcoin tomorrow. Dude, same with Montenegro real estate affecting the value of your apartment in Manhattan. > If bitcoin was the only possible cryptocurrency but the hype around cryptocurrencies was the same, a bitcoin would cost substantially more today. Just like if the rest of the land didn't exist, your Manhattan apartment would cost substantially more today.
- dkarras 5y ago
  I responded to this above but again just for you: land is ALREADY physically limited. the whole /point/ of cryptocurrencies was to provide the same type of scarcity artificially for the digital realm. my point is, the fact that you can create additional coins and split the liquidity between the two means that the task has failed. my further claim is that the even the attempt is futile. academically interesting, practically (for this given purpose) futile.
  - koonsolo 5y ago
    There is still so much open space to build cities, but everyone seems to want to live in the existing ones.
    - dkarras 5y ago
      ...because the existing and established ones have something unique to offer and to copy that would be an enormous (and slow) undertaking (but it is being done, civilization has always been spreading to free areas, it is just slow) - but once you crack open an hassle free secure consensus system (software, not bound by limited physical reality) the old one does not have anything unique to offer for the group of people who are unhappy about who holds the power. If there was an exact replica of Manhattan (or if it was trivial to create it) - and I mean really exact with all the affordances it provides - think of an empty copy of the world, Manhattan is in the same place, but mostly empty (just established), that you can switch to with a keypress (and could switch back and forth) - what would happen?