4 ms·

Every app on a blockchain is either financial, or financialized. All of them require some kind of financial transaction. Even previously non-financial things

Every app on a blockchain is either financial, or financialized. All of them require some kind of financial transaction. Even previously non-financial things like art (which is arguably not non-financial anyway) must at minimum pay gas costs to run, can be traded, and has a market value. The technology only works due to built-in financial and economic incentives that self-fund its operation. Everything running on a blockchain must contribute to that self-funding in some way, and thus must have a financial component. Take that aspect away and at best you have Bittorrent, and at worst just a garbled mess of something that doesn't work in any way. Love it or hate, blockchain's original use case was financial. That's its DNA. I don't think it can evolve beyond that.

k__ 4y ago
There are gasless blockchain networks, like Koinos, and alternatives like IOTA.
atak1 4y ago
Yeah unfortunately right now that is the case; you pay for Ethereum to onboard and participate, and most early adopters are people buying their way in. It doesn't have to be this way though. I don't think "blockchain's original use case was financial". Bitcoin's was. I'm not sure Ethereum and subsequent platforms have the same DNA.
- SkyMarshal 4y ago
  Bitcoin was the original blockchain, thus blockchain's original use case was financial. And it does have to be this way, they don't work otherwise, unless you just want Bittorrent. Regardless what Ethereum PR tries to claim, the reality is, public, permissionless, decentralized blockchains only work because they are designed to self-fund, and require everything running on them to pay into the system in some manner. They are all fundamentally financial.
  - atak1 4y ago
    This meaning of "fundamentally financial" sounds to me like designing incentive structures. If so, yes, blockchains are all "fundamentally financial". You need incentives for folks to keep the lights on. But aren't our lives "fundamentally financial" - exchanging our time for money? That doesn't mean that the work we do can't evolve beyond this fundamental incentive structure. I draw a line, for example, between the purposes of yield farming and ENS.

k__ 4y ago

There are gasless blockchain networks, like Koinos, and alternatives like IOTA.

atak1 4y ago

Yeah unfortunately right now that is the case; you pay for Ethereum to onboard and participate, and most early adopters are people buying their way in. It doesn't have to be this way though. I don't think "blockchain's original use case was financial". Bitcoin's was. I'm not sure Ethereum and subsequent platforms have the same DNA.

SkyMarshal 4y ago
Bitcoin was the original blockchain, thus blockchain's original use case was financial. And it does have to be this way, they don't work otherwise, unless you just want Bittorrent. Regardless what Ethereum PR tries to claim, the reality is, public, permissionless, decentralized blockchains only work because they are designed to self-fund, and require everything running on them to pay into the system in some manner. They are all fundamentally financial.
- atak1 4y ago
  This meaning of "fundamentally financial" sounds to me like designing incentive structures. If so, yes, blockchains are all "fundamentally financial". You need incentives for folks to keep the lights on. But aren't our lives "fundamentally financial" - exchanging our time for money? That doesn't mean that the work we do can't evolve beyond this fundamental incentive structure. I draw a line, for example, between the purposes of yield farming and ENS.