4 ms·

In theory it sounds like a reasonable explanation, but Helium is underperforming so much, that I doubt anyone would make the investment at this point.

wkat4242 4y ago
Also, Helium payouts seem to be based on amount of clients in a zone, which would make this pretty pointless. Helium hype really makes it difficult for other real IoT networks to operate also, like The Things Network, the operators of which do it for free (including myself). Why does everything have to be a moneymaker?
- hanniabu 4y ago
  > Why does everything have to be a moneymaker? Translation: "Why does everything need to be sustainable? Can't we just keep grifting off of people providing a service for free?" I always see comments here about open source projects needing better funding mechanisms. Crypto solves this but everyone scoffs at it because crypto has become some boogey man word that gets shunned mostly because of Bitcoin being first with no utility and wasteful energy and ignores any progress made in the space.
  - LordDragonfang 4y ago
    How does cryptocurrency solve any of the funding issues in open source, in ways that could not be achieved with traditional currency?
  - astrange 4y ago
    The problem is that it’s actually less motivating to get paid a small amount than it is to get paid nothing. So it probably feels bad to put up a node that’s rarely used even though, when it does get used, it’s especially appreciated. (Bad ideas in this space: GRCoin which pays you for folding@home but can never actually pay the power costs, Payver which supposedly paid for capturing road images while driving but ended up giving like $2/year.)
    - hanniabu 4y ago
      Those are issues with poor tokenomics and lack of traction. Some businesses fail, but that doesn't mean all do, or that it's impossible to create a good business.
RF_Enthusiast 4y ago
They may be legacy nodes, from when Helium was worth a lot. It's almost comical that, in this context, the term "legacy" is applicable for 1-year old nodes. Things change fast in the crypto world I guess!

wkat4242 4y ago

Also, Helium payouts seem to be based on amount of clients in a zone, which would make this pretty pointless. Helium hype really makes it difficult for other real IoT networks to operate also, like The Things Network, the operators of which do it for free (including myself). Why does everything have to be a moneymaker?

hanniabu 4y ago
> Why does everything have to be a moneymaker? Translation: "Why does everything need to be sustainable? Can't we just keep grifting off of people providing a service for free?" I always see comments here about open source projects needing better funding mechanisms. Crypto solves this but everyone scoffs at it because crypto has become some boogey man word that gets shunned mostly because of Bitcoin being first with no utility and wasteful energy and ignores any progress made in the space.
- LordDragonfang 4y ago
  How does cryptocurrency solve any of the funding issues in open source, in ways that could not be achieved with traditional currency?
- astrange 4y ago
  The problem is that it’s actually less motivating to get paid a small amount than it is to get paid nothing. So it probably feels bad to put up a node that’s rarely used even though, when it does get used, it’s especially appreciated. (Bad ideas in this space: GRCoin which pays you for folding@home but can never actually pay the power costs, Payver which supposedly paid for capturing road images while driving but ended up giving like $2/year.)
  - hanniabu 4y ago
    Those are issues with poor tokenomics and lack of traction. Some businesses fail, but that doesn't mean all do, or that it's impossible to create a good business.

RF_Enthusiast 4y ago

They may be legacy nodes, from when Helium was worth a lot. It's almost comical that, in this context, the term "legacy" is applicable for 1-year old nodes. Things change fast in the crypto world I guess!