3 ms·

The web was invented in 1989, and by 2002 we already had an entire dotcom explosion and collapse. Google was a four year old established company. Using the inte

The web was invented in 1989, and by 2002 we already had an entire dotcom explosion and collapse. Google was a four year old established company. Using the internet was completely mainstream. Everyone at every age was using it and had uses for it. No, the early web was not primarily scams. Blockchain is well over a decade old and still searching for a way to be useful. Early internet was mostly military or educational. No widespread usage among everyday people. No big scams that I’m aware of, but mostly because no one was using it or could use it.

yieldcrv 4y ago
when comparing with Darpanet, blockchain has been wildly successful and growing at a very fast pace, compressing 40 years of activity into just 10. But when thinking about just the WWW +10 years, then blockchain is only growing at a moderate pace.
- Jasper_ 4y ago
  Uh, yeah, if you compare it to DARPAnet, a defense-oriented research project, of course it wasn't growing. DARPAnet wasn't commercial and wasn't designed to to grow, it was focused on military communications. By the time it was declassified & evolved into a semi-public general network in the 80s, accessible through universities who partnered with the DoD, everybody wanted in on the action. Even before we had HTTP and the web and the dot-com bubble and the explosion of "e-commerce", e-mail and usenet were both going strong with active communities. Scams did exist, as they do in every communication medium (chain letters used to refer to actual letters you got in the mail!), but they were a sideshow.
  - yieldcrv 4y ago
    The intrinsic financial nature of blockchains merely lets you quantify it. And instead of distinguishing what transactional activity is and isn't a scam to even begin quantifying it, blanket statements with fluid goal posts are chosen instead. The “non-commercial” internet was used for financial speculation for decades, while this is seen as an invalid use case of blockchain transactional activity by those who chose to denigrate the whole concept. For services that do distinguish scam vs licit transaction types, the highest estimates of scams in the billions of dollars pale in comparison to all the rest of the transactional activity by volume and asset size. Its nearly impossible to have an answer to the premise presented.
- parkingrift 4y ago
  I think it’s pretty silly to compare it to what was essentially a research and defense project. That’s why I compared it to the web. I wouldn’t consider blockchain ecosystem growth as moderate at all. There is no growth. There are zero unique use cases on blockchain. No blockchain apps or use cases that couldn’t exist without blockchain. It’s an ecosystem for gambling on shit coins and reinventing the wheel.
  - yieldcrv 4y ago
    I think about the state of the protocols involved Having been involved with ratification of various protocols in the blockchain space Most of the speculative action from new types of assets comes before ratification Its much more similar to a rudimentary networking protocol than a commercialized internet

yieldcrv 4y ago

when comparing with Darpanet, blockchain has been wildly successful and growing at a very fast pace, compressing 40 years of activity into just 10. But when thinking about just the WWW +10 years, then blockchain is only growing at a moderate pace.

Jasper_ 4y ago
Uh, yeah, if you compare it to DARPAnet, a defense-oriented research project, of course it wasn't growing. DARPAnet wasn't commercial and wasn't designed to to grow, it was focused on military communications. By the time it was declassified & evolved into a semi-public general network in the 80s, accessible through universities who partnered with the DoD, everybody wanted in on the action. Even before we had HTTP and the web and the dot-com bubble and the explosion of "e-commerce", e-mail and usenet were both going strong with active communities. Scams did exist, as they do in every communication medium (chain letters used to refer to actual letters you got in the mail!), but they were a sideshow.
- yieldcrv 4y ago
  The intrinsic financial nature of blockchains merely lets you quantify it. And instead of distinguishing what transactional activity is and isn't a scam to even begin quantifying it, blanket statements with fluid goal posts are chosen instead. The “non-commercial” internet was used for financial speculation for decades, while this is seen as an invalid use case of blockchain transactional activity by those who chose to denigrate the whole concept. For services that do distinguish scam vs licit transaction types, the highest estimates of scams in the billions of dollars pale in comparison to all the rest of the transactional activity by volume and asset size. Its nearly impossible to have an answer to the premise presented.
parkingrift 4y ago
I think it’s pretty silly to compare it to what was essentially a research and defense project. That’s why I compared it to the web. I wouldn’t consider blockchain ecosystem growth as moderate at all. There is no growth. There are zero unique use cases on blockchain. No blockchain apps or use cases that couldn’t exist without blockchain. It’s an ecosystem for gambling on shit coins and reinventing the wheel.
- yieldcrv 4y ago
  I think about the state of the protocols involved Having been involved with ratification of various protocols in the blockchain space Most of the speculative action from new types of assets comes before ratification Its much more similar to a rudimentary networking protocol than a commercialized internet