5 ms·
> to be decentralized and permissionless systems that support peer-to-peer forms of exchange and ownership, and they largely succeed in their defined goals. Th
by dmitriid 4y ago
> to be decentralized and permissionless systems that support peer-to-peer forms of exchange and ownership, and they largely succeed in their defined goals.
They... they don't succeed. Like, at all. Except for a tiny bit in their own digital bubbles where everything is defined in crypto. And even there it's highly questionable.
- whatisweb3 4y agoSure they do - these protocols define digital assets that can be owned in a non-custodial manner, and exchanged and escrowed via peer-to-peer mechanisms without fear of double-spend. These are the goals of the protocols, and both BTC and ETH have succeeded wildly at doing this specific task, facilitating billions of dollars worth of transfers for several years without any notable record of a double-spend or network downtime. This says nothing about their USD spot trading price, or the practicality of securing large amounts of wealth with a 24-word private key, or the expectation that these technologies should somehow replace all corners of the world's financial transactions.