2 ms·

Does it matter? BTC and ETH are the version 1 of something "new". The version one is the playground. There is plenty demand for ETH/BTC like systems without the

by noxer 5y ago

Does it matter? BTC and ETH are the version 1 of something "new". The version one is the playground. There is plenty demand for ETH/BTC like systems without the inefficiencies and so people are building better systems. Flare is an new project that will (maybe, probably, who knows) be able to run everything ETH can because it uses the EVM but it does not use PoW or PoS and thus will not have the fees and slowness. Maybe Flare will still not cut it and die like the countless other projects then something else will come. Its just tech/code in the end. When it comes to real utility people will use whatever there is that delivers. Unlike with the whole gambling where people mostly set their money on the big coins regardless of if its actually useful (its mostly not). There are some big companies out there building amazing stuff. Crypto people especially bitcoin people often hate them because they represent the "real world" with banks and regulations and all that. And ofc they dont build anything on BTC because its tech s*cks and is p much useless for anything beside speculation Both BTC and ETH could be gone some day, the technology however will not go away. Most of the "bad" thing people point out is exclusively to PoW system anyway, like the whole energy wasting things. Its completely irrelevant for 99% of all other projects. Its kinda like if people would yell at cars because there are these huge diesel trucks that blow out black smoke in a world where ~99% of all cares are EVs. And then comes an article like this one here calling for banning cars because of the black smoke he saw the other day. Reality check: We dont ban cars because some cares blow out black smoke. We dont ban crypto because some (one) uses whole coal mines of energy.

abeppu 5y ago
to summarize: - in an ancestor post, crypto skeptic asks "but what does it doooo?" - response, "Bitcoin doesn't do much, but Ethereum does stuff" - me, skeptical "But does Ethereum actually do stuff?" - answer: "no, but something else in the future might" We're 13 years into blockchain technologies, and it seems like there's still not a convincing case of it being a good, useful solution to a real need. Saying that the next thing will be better stretches credulity.
- noxer 5y ago
  You have to differ between use-case and tech A good use-case likely does not work on the popular tech that we have today. Like the original use-case of p2p-money (ignore if this use-case actually makes sense or not). It does not work with bitcoin, its way to slow and expensive. Now if you create a new "bitcoin" that does work for the use case p2p-cash then this should in theory replace the old bitcoin. But in reality it does not. Bitcoin turned into a gambling thing and tribalism over what the real bitcoin is and should do. And your actual solution likely gets no attention at all because its just one of many thousands of other blockchains from which 99+% are useless and probably hundred also say they solved the p2p-cash problem. The chance to taking over bitcoin is essentially zero in the near time future it doesn't matter how much better something is. We have tech that objectively way way better than bitcoin since at lest 8 years now and no one who is not into crypto has ever heard form it. Low TPS/Longe blocktims/energy consumption etc. etc. all solved problems since many many years, yet this is what mainstream crypto talks about. So your better bitcoin does not "succeed" since 8+ years... Does that mean the tech you made for p2p-cash is bad/useless? Does that mean the tech does not work for the use-case? Does that mean another XX years without anything useful coming out? It sure looks like that but maybe it just means that everyone else has no clue what tech and use-cases actually could/would/do work because they are all in the shadow of the big 1 coin that failed at everything it tired to be but gets all the attention anyway. I'm not saying the next thing will magically do everything better. But its just a matter of time before projects that actually do something get the attention. It may take a long long time for that to happen. Most of the new people who came into the crypto space in the last years are in no way able to distinguish between useless stuff like bitcoin, stuff that is straight out a scams and stuff that actually solve a problem better than solutions without blockchain tech could. They are often not even into tech, they are into money. All the scams would not work if a majority of people would have a decent understanding of the tech. And even the people who have the skills, can not evaluate the different techs in a meaningful way. Ive dug into many projects myself over the years and almost everything is useless but most I will never even look at because it somehow has to get my attention first. Nonetheless there is n doubt the tech is revolutionary and it will sooner or later power stuff normal people use likely without them knowing, also likely stuff that has nothing to do with money. Its kinda funny how the whole crypto space focuses on how to use the tech with money but there so much more that can be done.

by noxer 5y ago

abeppu 5y ago

to summarize: - in an ancestor post, crypto skeptic asks "but what does it doooo?" - response, "Bitcoin doesn't do much, but Ethereum does stuff" - me, skeptical "But does Ethereum actually do stuff?" - answer: "no, but something else in the future might" We're 13 years into blockchain technologies, and it seems like there's still not a convincing case of it being a good, useful solution to a real need. Saying that the next thing will be better stretches credulity.

noxer 5y ago
You have to differ between use-case and tech A good use-case likely does not work on the popular tech that we have today. Like the original use-case of p2p-money (ignore if this use-case actually makes sense or not). It does not work with bitcoin, its way to slow and expensive. Now if you create a new "bitcoin" that does work for the use case p2p-cash then this should in theory replace the old bitcoin. But in reality it does not. Bitcoin turned into a gambling thing and tribalism over what the real bitcoin is and should do. And your actual solution likely gets no attention at all because its just one of many thousands of other blockchains from which 99+% are useless and probably hundred also say they solved the p2p-cash problem. The chance to taking over bitcoin is essentially zero in the near time future it doesn't matter how much better something is. We have tech that objectively way way better than bitcoin since at lest 8 years now and no one who is not into crypto has ever heard form it. Low TPS/Longe blocktims/energy consumption etc. etc. all solved problems since many many years, yet this is what mainstream crypto talks about. So your better bitcoin does not "succeed" since 8+ years... Does that mean the tech you made for p2p-cash is bad/useless? Does that mean the tech does not work for the use-case? Does that mean another XX years without anything useful coming out? It sure looks like that but maybe it just means that everyone else has no clue what tech and use-cases actually could/would/do work because they are all in the shadow of the big 1 coin that failed at everything it tired to be but gets all the attention anyway. I'm not saying the next thing will magically do everything better. But its just a matter of time before projects that actually do something get the attention. It may take a long long time for that to happen. Most of the new people who came into the crypto space in the last years are in no way able to distinguish between useless stuff like bitcoin, stuff that is straight out a scams and stuff that actually solve a problem better than solutions without blockchain tech could. They are often not even into tech, they are into money. All the scams would not work if a majority of people would have a decent understanding of the tech. And even the people who have the skills, can not evaluate the different techs in a meaningful way. Ive dug into many projects myself over the years and almost everything is useless but most I will never even look at because it somehow has to get my attention first. Nonetheless there is n doubt the tech is revolutionary and it will sooner or later power stuff normal people use likely without them knowing, also likely stuff that has nothing to do with money. Its kinda funny how the whole crypto space focuses on how to use the tech with money but there so much more that can be done.