4 ms·
> The technology is almost irrelevant at this point. There I disagree, my news feeds in other places are heavily populated by development discussion, and word
by vmception 5y ago
> The technology is almost irrelevant at this point.
There I disagree, my news feeds in other places are heavily populated by development discussion, and word travels fast in the crypto-sphere. So aside from noticing that HN consensus is distinctly not part of it, it would be hard for me to agree less or disagree more. But people are here, they just arent the active contributors and arent coordinated to elevate their posts and comments.
For example, I just had the realization that I could learn a new programming language to write smart contracts solely because I dont need to market myself to out-of-touch recruiters and hiring managers. Deploying stuff onchain is lucrative enough. This changes the entire incentive model of a software engineer, or even a founder’s new venture, as both would otherwise need to optimize for new and shiny web 2.0 frameworks just to attract talent or be attractive to the next company.
- kortilla 5y agoYou might disagree, but it’s the case for how the crypto world works for the 99.999% who aren’t developers. I’m not saying that you can’t get good RSS feeds, small communities, etc. I’m saying that any discussions about crypto are going to be completely dominated by the people that love/hate crypto fighting over the non-technical aspects. This isn’t special to hackernews or crypto, it just happens with anything that becomes disruptive in a good and/or bad way to vocal segments of society. The same thing happens if discussions were to come up about effective mask technology, better abortion methods, gun improvements, etc. The people actually interested and capable of discussing the technology are dwarfed by the people who have feelings they feel compelled to share.
- vmception 5y agoThis is a technology forum populated by developers, they shouldn’t be the out of touch speculators and critics of speculators
- fragmede 5y ago> Deploying stuff onchain is lucrative enough. That seems very interesting! But how does deploying stuff on-chain change the calculus? An unknown person with no Twitter following who's not a member of a Yacht Club/other NFT gang can deploy a contract, but getting people to want to use the contract seems to be a problem for a lone-wolf developer. Or am I only seeing the tip of the iceberg for the ecosystem?
- vmception 5y agoYes, tip of the iceberg. Getting people to use it is not as hard as you think, unless it’s an entirely new concept. Do more of what works and improves people’s experience, undercut fees from existing contracts. Or make a premium version for that audience segment. AMMs Farming Bridges Wrapping services Zapping services (wrapping + amm lp + farming in one transaction) Yield optimizers (slightly solving issue with LP farming and AMMs) And if you create a token it advertises itself, bots watch for LPs on AMMs to interact and humans notice the interaction, but another area you can compete is based on how community minded the token is, versus obvious self enrichment I intentionally chose not to make this a primer on all the acronyms I also scan the blockchains for certain method signatures of previously popular, which appear when they are invoked. So I find copycat contracts this way, which helps me know about new projects and communities. Either way to your original question: The time to market is extremely short, the funnel is nearly non-existent with crypto natives, and the overhead costs are lower if you can code - all compared to SaaS deployment or being employed by a SaaS service