3 ms·
I think this is exactly right. The implementation of the technology has necessitated all of these different layers, each of which create new opportunities to ta
by ordinaryradical 5y ago
I think this is exactly right. The implementation of the technology has necessitated all of these different layers, each of which create new opportunities to take a cut.
Many of the crypto businesses in the ecosystem talk about removing financial friction and control, but it seems they are only interested in introducing their own versions of them, and building their own little Wall Street while they can still get in on the ground floor.
Here's a great example: how are you going to "reach the unbanked" in the third world if you have transaction fees, paid by the user, inherent in your architecture? That's just nonsense. It's a step down from cash in every way. Cryptos which aren't feeless but talk about the "unbanked" are full of hot air. And this pattern of false promises is all over this space.
- mattdesl 5y agotransaction fees on L2s are in fractions of a cent, certainly lower than the fees paid to PayPal or Stripe on regular international payments. a feeless public ledger seems unlikely to ever work at scale; it would immediately be polluted by spam.
- ordinaryradical 5y agoA feeless public ledger already exists, is transacting around the world, and has overcome spam attacks multiple times at this point: Nano, from one of the original developers of Bitcoin.
- mattdesl 5y agothanks, hadn’t heard of Nano before, it looks interesting. I should correct to say a decentralized public ledger “free of transaction costs” is hard if not impossible. Nano seems to remove fees by having users engage in PoW (ie: cost of energy expenditure), so it is feeless but not free.