Unfortunately, there’s really no way for anyone to ever accuse any cryptocurrency of being superfluous without its investors feeling personally attacked on some

Unfortunately, there’s really no way for anyone to ever accuse any cryptocurrency of being superfluous without its investors feeling personally attacked on some level. This frequently causes them to lash out. Also unfortunate is the fact many internet users take silence as evidence of consent, and so just doing the obvious thing here — not having this conversation at all — would actively promote ignorance (see: “Bitcoin is obviously not good for small and fast transactions”). > Designing a new blockchain that is good at that is innovation. Not a “shitcoin”. Blockchains don’t create efficiencies: if not for decentralization and censorship resistance, which inherently come at a higher cost than centralization, there would be little point in the technology at all. A plain immutable database with cryptographic proofs of inclusion — e.g. ImmuDB — hosted by a trusted org would perform orders of magnitude better than a blockchain at the very same tasks. As most people can plainly see, what passes for “innovation” in the blockchain space is often a solution in search of a problem, launched first and foremost as a courtship display to HNWIs, socially signaling for them to invest in the cryptocurrency at hand under the guise of it being “innovative”. Ethereum 2.0’s newly introduced “RocketPool” (RPL) token [1] is an unwitting quintessential example of this: So if insurance isn't the real reason, then why do node operators need to buy an additional 10% in RPL ($5,600 at current prices)? The only logical answer is to force buying pressure and pump the token. Adding a token means the protocol is now more likely to contain bugs, audits are more difficult, users are confused, and taxes become a nightmare. I hope greed isn't the real driving force behind the RPL token, but that's the only conclusion I can draw. They increased smart contract risk for a payday, and it's possible the entire Ethereum ecosystem will pay for it. “Gee, do we really need this new token and blockchain?” “Couldn’t there be other ways of doing this which aren’t obviously designed to enrich the founders?” Put simply, launching a superfluous blockchain and token is just poor etiquette, and the people who point out this dynamic don’t deserve to be dismissed with endearing terms. Bitcoiners have nothing against defi, it’s just a question of whether a new token or blockchain is needed to do the things these people purportedly want to do for the world, or whether the new token/blockchain is really just a pretense for self-enrichment. HTH See also: Nomic [2], SmartBCH, or Stacks [1]: https://www.reddit.com/r/ethstaker/comments/ncqqu2/rocketpool_reminds_me_of_the_dao/ https://www.reddit.com/r/ethstaker/comments/ncqqu2/rocketpoo... [2]: https://nomic.io/ https://nomic.io/