3 ms·

I think two of the coming applications that has me most excited (of which there are many others on the horizon), are permission-less stock markets where shares

I think two of the coming applications that has me most excited (of which there are many others on the horizon), are permission-less stock markets where shares are fully accounted for at all times in real-time (an actually transparent financial market), and proper third party markets for digital goods whereby goods bought online can essentially be treated like you do physical goods. Both are applications of NFTs and both have significant players developing them. I can elaborate more on these two applications if you want. Currently on mobile.

graeme 5y ago
I’m much more interested in something already happening, now. Crypto is full of “wait and see, this is the future” but the early internet had immediate utility. What can I do, today that should make me want to buy the crypto to do a thing with crypto. Rather than buy crypto to hope for an increase in value.
tome 5y ago
> permission-less stock markets where shares are fully accounted for at all times in real-time We can already achieve this without blockchain technology! Indeed that's not the way the system works, but that's not due to technological limitation. What makes you think that once "permissionless stock markets" are available on the blockchain then secondary derivative markets won't spring up, making the ownership situation as murky is it currently is for stocks?
- jimmydorry 5y ago
  Transparency is always a sliding scale, and right now there is very little transparancy with regards to who owns what stock and how much of it. The system is currently more paper based than digitally reconcilled. And the onus is on every financial firm (bank, hedge fund, brokerage, settlement house, etc.) to maintain their own books and report back as best they feel inclined to. What they volunatarily report back can be ammended, or late. And when you add up all the human induced delays / data entry mistakes, what the public has available to look at can be months out of date or just plain wrong. In principal, yes, the trusted parties could have stepped up and implemented a more transparant and automated system. No, they did not need to base such a solution on a blockchain. But the reality is that they were not inclined to change the status-quo, and now we find ourselves in a world where every relevant financial system is looking at, testing, or in the process of rolling out a blockchain based solution. For anyone asking where the value in the technology lies, the proof is in how seriously the large players [1] are taking it. [1] just one of the many public facing examples of a blockchain-based stock market (under the CHESS replacement program): https://www2.asx.com.au/markets/clearing-and-settlement-services/chess-replacement/about-chess-replacement https://www2.asx.com.au/markets/clearing-and-settlement-serv...

graeme 5y ago

I’m much more interested in something already happening, now. Crypto is full of “wait and see, this is the future” but the early internet had immediate utility. What can I do, today that should make me want to buy the crypto to do a thing with crypto. Rather than buy crypto to hope for an increase in value.

tome 5y ago

> permission-less stock markets where shares are fully accounted for at all times in real-time We can already achieve this without blockchain technology! Indeed that's not the way the system works, but that's not due to technological limitation. What makes you think that once "permissionless stock markets" are available on the blockchain then secondary derivative markets won't spring up, making the ownership situation as murky is it currently is for stocks?

jimmydorry 5y ago
Transparency is always a sliding scale, and right now there is very little transparancy with regards to who owns what stock and how much of it. The system is currently more paper based than digitally reconcilled. And the onus is on every financial firm (bank, hedge fund, brokerage, settlement house, etc.) to maintain their own books and report back as best they feel inclined to. What they volunatarily report back can be ammended, or late. And when you add up all the human induced delays / data entry mistakes, what the public has available to look at can be months out of date or just plain wrong. In principal, yes, the trusted parties could have stepped up and implemented a more transparant and automated system. No, they did not need to base such a solution on a blockchain. But the reality is that they were not inclined to change the status-quo, and now we find ourselves in a world where every relevant financial system is looking at, testing, or in the process of rolling out a blockchain based solution. For anyone asking where the value in the technology lies, the proof is in how seriously the large players [1] are taking it. [1] just one of the many public facing examples of a blockchain-based stock market (under the CHESS replacement program): https://www2.asx.com.au/markets/clearing-and-settlement-services/chess-replacement/about-chess-replacement https://www2.asx.com.au/markets/clearing-and-settlement-serv...