3 ms·

Most crypto developers don't work on the cryptocurrencies that work as currencies because they're established and they want a higher return so they make yet ano

Most crypto developers don't work on the cryptocurrencies that work as currencies because they're established and they want a higher return so they make yet another alt-coin. I'm not saying there aren't good new ideas in new alt-coins/etc. I'm just saying if we're making a big deal about the number of devs, the above is the main factor.

71a54xd 4y ago
An annoying discord really only gets you so far
robbyking 4y ago
Right? You throw where the receiver is going, not where they are.
kerkeslager 4y ago
Eh, I think it's a pretty... ambitious claim that the time for new cryptocurrencies is over. I think that most cryptocurrencies are intentional scams, and the vast majority of the remainder are bad ideas, but there are literally thousands of cryptocurrencies released each year at this point. Out of that cesspool, I'd expect to see maybe 1 or 2 successful ideas a year. Note I didn't say "good", I said "successful"--in general I think cryptocurrencies are bad for society, but lots of things that are bad for society are successful. This past year, I think Avalanche Consensus and Near's Deep Sharding were pretty decent ideas. I don't know if they're good enough to translate into long-term success for either coin, but I suspect in the long run, deep sharding drawing inspiration from Near will end up in Ethereum. An idea which has been hinted at, which I think would be an improvement, would be an ecosystem which isn't programmable, but pulls successful ideas from programmable ecosystems. A few L1 chains at this point have added integrated oracles, but I don't think that takes the idea far enough. A chain with integrated UniSwap, integrated Aave, etc., and no way to add your own coins without consensus from validators, would have no scams and be more performant, while keeping the value of those products in the coin itself. It would be harder to build hype for, because you can't have a gold rush of developers coming in to build the same old coins and investors to try to get in early, but in the long run it seems more sustainable.
- rrdharan 4y ago
  > literally millions of cryptocurrencies I believe that's literally not true. I think it's thousands.
  - kerkeslager 4y ago
    Thanks for the correction. Edited.
j0hnyl 4y ago
Crypto developers are not primarily working on alt coins. They're working on enterprise blockchains with niche applications, or working on building dapps on top of existing chains.
- cm2187 4y ago
  Driven by MBAs who told their IT department to do crypto, whatever that means, because they read it is the future.
  - j0hnyl 4y ago
    I really don't think this is it. I've not heard of many tech companies just shifting their existing efforts onto crypto. A notable exception are big tech companies that are used to making lots of bets, so of course they allocate some of their resources in order to dabble. Personally, what I like about crypto as an eco-system is that it has a very low barrier to entry and there is lots of room for scrappy startups. If a few people want to get together and and build a protocol or dapp to run on top of Ethereum, they can do so, deploy their code, and if the market responds positively to their project, they can start collecting revenue immediately.
    - cm2187 4y ago
      Tech companies, I agree, because their management would be fairly IT-litterate. But outside of tech companies certainly.
- superkuh 4y ago
  That's the ".../etc". Alt-coins/etc where etc is anything which creates a new pool of value which the developers skim off first. No one is seriously using blockchains for enterprise stuff because there's no reason to besides abusing the name for notability. If they're serious they use a database because as an enterprise there's always someone who all parties trust. Follow the flowchart. http://erewhon.superkuh.com/pictures/do-you-need-a-blockchain.png http://erewhon.superkuh.com/pictures/do-you-need-a-blockchai...
ASalazarMX 4y ago
Creating a new e-coin has the perverse incentive of mining the low-hanging fruit in private, with the hope of it becoming valuable and making the founder(s) billionaires. I can't take seriously any e-coin that follows this path.
Oxidation 4y ago
> I'm not saying there aren't good new ideas in new alt-coins/etc I'll say it, though. What do all these coins do that's special except attempt to make money for the relevant company? What problem does alt-coin #45321 solve?
- tromp 4y ago
  Some of the things they (well, one at least) do: - avoiding unnecessary complexity - avoiding early miner advantage - avoiding any financial rewards for its creators - improving privacy and scalability
  - Oxidation 4y ago
    None of those things are a purpose, though.

71a54xd 4y ago

An annoying discord really only gets you so far

robbyking 4y ago

Right? You throw where the receiver is going, not where they are.

kerkeslager 4y ago

Eh, I think it's a pretty... ambitious claim that the time for new cryptocurrencies is over. I think that most cryptocurrencies are intentional scams, and the vast majority of the remainder are bad ideas, but there are literally thousands of cryptocurrencies released each year at this point. Out of that cesspool, I'd expect to see maybe 1 or 2 successful ideas a year. Note I didn't say "good", I said "successful"--in general I think cryptocurrencies are bad for society, but lots of things that are bad for society are successful. This past year, I think Avalanche Consensus and Near's Deep Sharding were pretty decent ideas. I don't know if they're good enough to translate into long-term success for either coin, but I suspect in the long run, deep sharding drawing inspiration from Near will end up in Ethereum. An idea which has been hinted at, which I think would be an improvement, would be an ecosystem which isn't programmable, but pulls successful ideas from programmable ecosystems. A few L1 chains at this point have added integrated oracles, but I don't think that takes the idea far enough. A chain with integrated UniSwap, integrated Aave, etc., and no way to add your own coins without consensus from validators, would have no scams and be more performant, while keeping the value of those products in the coin itself. It would be harder to build hype for, because you can't have a gold rush of developers coming in to build the same old coins and investors to try to get in early, but in the long run it seems more sustainable.

rrdharan 4y ago
> literally millions of cryptocurrencies I believe that's literally not true. I think it's thousands.
- kerkeslager 4y ago
  Thanks for the correction. Edited.

j0hnyl 4y ago

Crypto developers are not primarily working on alt coins. They're working on enterprise blockchains with niche applications, or working on building dapps on top of existing chains.

cm2187 4y ago
Driven by MBAs who told their IT department to do crypto, whatever that means, because they read it is the future.
- j0hnyl 4y ago
  I really don't think this is it. I've not heard of many tech companies just shifting their existing efforts onto crypto. A notable exception are big tech companies that are used to making lots of bets, so of course they allocate some of their resources in order to dabble. Personally, what I like about crypto as an eco-system is that it has a very low barrier to entry and there is lots of room for scrappy startups. If a few people want to get together and and build a protocol or dapp to run on top of Ethereum, they can do so, deploy their code, and if the market responds positively to their project, they can start collecting revenue immediately.
  - cm2187 4y ago
    Tech companies, I agree, because their management would be fairly IT-litterate. But outside of tech companies certainly.
superkuh 4y ago
That's the ".../etc". Alt-coins/etc where etc is anything which creates a new pool of value which the developers skim off first. No one is seriously using blockchains for enterprise stuff because there's no reason to besides abusing the name for notability. If they're serious they use a database because as an enterprise there's always someone who all parties trust. Follow the flowchart. http://erewhon.superkuh.com/pictures/do-you-need-a-blockchain.png http://erewhon.superkuh.com/pictures/do-you-need-a-blockchai...

ASalazarMX 4y ago

Creating a new e-coin has the perverse incentive of mining the low-hanging fruit in private, with the hope of it becoming valuable and making the founder(s) billionaires. I can't take seriously any e-coin that follows this path.

Oxidation 4y ago

> I'm not saying there aren't good new ideas in new alt-coins/etc I'll say it, though. What do all these coins do that's special except attempt to make money for the relevant company? What problem does alt-coin #45321 solve?

tromp 4y ago
Some of the things they (well, one at least) do: - avoiding unnecessary complexity - avoiding early miner advantage - avoiding any financial rewards for its creators - improving privacy and scalability
- Oxidation 4y ago
  None of those things are a purpose, though.