8 ms·
Here are the qualities that I think are special about this model: (1) the platform is organic; (2) critical mass kicks in pretty quickly. Organic: it would be
by cturner 5y ago
Here are the qualities that I think are special about this model: (1) the platform is organic; (2) critical mass kicks in pretty quickly.
Organic: it would be unrealistic to attempt to solve the wine problem as a one-off registry. But once the infrastructure exists, it becomes trivial to solve the wine problem.
You point out that many of the individual scenarios could be solved by a conventional registry. This is good criticism, thanks.
Maybe the role of the chain is not to be a log of everything, but rather to be a system of governance.
Participating registries need to be onboarded to the chain, and need to abide by the rules to stay onboarded.
Governance consists of humans (proof-of-stake parties) who serve as regulators and magistrates for participating registries. They ensure that the APIs are in good order, and have the ability to excommunicate systems that are not playing by the system. In this model, the chain serves the same role as a nation state, but it does not have land.
The artwork problem is still useful, though, because it is a problem that allows you to bootstrap the platform. Analogy: Amazon was initially about books, but Amazon was never really about books.
- prepend 5y agoYour use case is much cheaper with just a wiki. The NFT layer only adds lots of cost and speculation. Or a single trusted entity is more likely to organically arise than an NFT market solution. The issue that these sound decent in theory, but in practice they suck because of costs. And for sustainability, I’d rather deal with the government to run it. If they would arise organically, they would have already. The problem is that the incentives is for jerks trying to make money than people to collaborate.