3 ms·

Sure, but if every blockchain project is just "building something for the blockchain" then where is the actual value?

by stnmtn 3y ago

pcthrowaway 3y ago
You seem to be drawing a distinction here between companies that are building something for blockchain vs building something for people. Alright, I'll bite, here are some projects that use blockchain for things besides trading tokens or improving blockchain technology: - https://sarcophagus.io/ https://sarcophagus.io/ - https://www.gitcoin.co/ https://www.gitcoin.co/ - https://docs.kleros.io/ https://docs.kleros.io/ There's many more. Many don't have a lot of adoption, and I don't know if they will. But at the very least it's often interesting to see how traditional systems are reimagined in order to enable decentralized, trustless, computer programs (with humans interacting at the perimeter) to fulfill roles which would traditionally be filled by centralized, trusted intermediaries (often humans). If for no other reason than getting a front seat as many of them fall apart spectacularly but also because it's intellectually fascinating to see problems approached in an inverted manner.
- troupo 3y ago
  > But at the very least it's often interesting to see how traditional systems are reimagined in order to enable decentralized, trustless, computer programs They are not re-imagined. It's a combination of a still on-ongoing gold rush (well, the end tail of it) and people pretending there are purely technical solutions to all problems. Almost every single of those "interesting re-imagining" projects rather quickly rediscovers why traditional systems are the way they are, and end up being shittier versions of those.
  - pcthrowaway 3y ago
    > well, the end tail of it Whatever your feelings on the impact of the technology are, you can't possibly know this > Almost every single of those "interesting re-imagining" projects rather quickly rediscovers why traditional systems are the way they are, and end up being shittier versions of those. I pretty much agree with this, though I'd suggest "most" rather than "almost every". Most scientific studies may fail to support their hypothesis also, that doesn't make them uninteresting.
    - troupo 3y ago
      > I pretty much agree with this, though I'd suggest "most" rather than "almost every". The absolute vast majority (outside of scams, obviously). > Most scientific studies may fail to support their hypothesis also, that doesn't make them uninteresting. Scientific studies don't pretend to be re-imagining anything.

Sure, but if every blockchain project is just "building something for the blockchain" then where is the actual value?

by stnmtn 3y ago

Sure, but if every blockchain project is just "building something for the blockchain" then where is the actual value?

You seem to be drawing a distinction here between companies that are building something for blockchain vs building something for people. Alright, I'll bite, here are some projects that use blockchain for things besides trading tokens or improving blockchain technology: - https://sarcophagus.io/ https://sarcophagus.io/ - https://www.gitcoin.co/ https://www.gitcoin.co/ - https://docs.kleros.io/ https://docs.kleros.io/ There's many more. Many don't have a lot of adoption, and I don't know if they will. But at the very least it's often interesting to see how traditional systems are reimagined in order to enable decentralized, trustless, computer programs (with humans interacting at the perimeter) to fulfill roles which would traditionally be filled by centralized, trusted intermediaries (often humans). If for no other reason than getting a front seat as many of them fall apart spectacularly but also because it's intellectually fascinating to see problems approached in an inverted manner.

troupo 3y ago
> But at the very least it's often interesting to see how traditional systems are reimagined in order to enable decentralized, trustless, computer programs They are not re-imagined. It's a combination of a still on-ongoing gold rush (well, the end tail of it) and people pretending there are purely technical solutions to all problems. Almost every single of those "interesting re-imagining" projects rather quickly rediscovers why traditional systems are the way they are, and end up being shittier versions of those.
- pcthrowaway 3y ago
  > well, the end tail of it Whatever your feelings on the impact of the technology are, you can't possibly know this > Almost every single of those "interesting re-imagining" projects rather quickly rediscovers why traditional systems are the way they are, and end up being shittier versions of those. I pretty much agree with this, though I'd suggest "most" rather than "almost every". Most scientific studies may fail to support their hypothesis also, that doesn't make them uninteresting.
  - troupo 3y ago
    > I pretty much agree with this, though I'd suggest "most" rather than "almost every". The absolute vast majority (outside of scams, obviously). > Most scientific studies may fail to support their hypothesis also, that doesn't make them uninteresting. Scientific studies don't pretend to be re-imagining anything.