Earlier quoted context omitted.
One correctiong. NFTs is just a tool. I believe what you mean is that Digital Arts market based on NFTs is a bubble.
Another application I've seen is using NFTs for reselling digital tickets.
I hate tickets resellers.
Why Web3?
561–570 of 706 posts
Re: Why Web3?
#562Re: Why Web3?
#563The blockchain can be interesting for a small part of a process that requires an immutable public history.
For everything else needed in a distributed internet we should look at the Bittorrent / Scihub / Pirate world that has been delivering distributed content and value for decades from day 1.
But that part will not make money to anybody, just value to a lot of people.
Re: Why Web3?
#564Earlier quoted context omitted.
Largely agree with this. The big promise of defi was to “bank the unbanked”, but Eth is - slow (15 txn/sec, 22-23 with the move to proof of stake) - expensive (I read somewhere that globally Eth users spend more on 30M USD in fees per day!) - too volatile to be reliable for everyday banking use cases - bad for the environment Blockchain technology is interesting and very powerful, but VCs and founders have all too of…
> Largely agree with this. The big promise of defi was to “bank the unbanked” The un-banked aren't un-banked because there are no banks, or even because banks are inaccessible. They are un-banked because they do not have money. This is a social problem characterized by folks falling through the cracks. It's a lack of social safety net, a lack of unionization, a lack of inflation-adjusted minimum wage, a lack of healt…
> I've never met a single person who had money but couldn't get a bank account* - have you?
I don't agree with defi but this is absolutely a problem in a lot of rural america. People with money, who get paid, but without a bank so they have to take their checks to gas stations who take huge fees.
That you haven't met someone like this isn't surprising at all.
Re: Why Web3?
#565Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Largely agree with this. The big promise of defi was to “bank the unbanked” The un-banked aren't un-banked because there are no banks, or even because banks are inaccessible. They are un-banked because they do not have money. This is a social problem characterized by folks falling through the cracks. It's a lack of social safety net, a lack of unionization, a lack of inflation-adjusted minimum wage, a lack of healt…
> I've never met a single person who had money but couldn't get a bank account* - have you? I don't agree with defi but this is absolutely a problem in a lot of rural america. People with money, who get paid, but without a bank so they have to take their checks to gas stations who take huge fees. That you haven't met someone like this isn't surprising at all.
Why can't they open an online checking account like Ally which will allow them to deposit a photo of their check free of charge? My understanding is a lot of low-income folks have smartphones as desktop replacements. Is this not a strictly better solution than anything in crypto?
I'm also open to postal banking as a solution to this problem, but I'm not really clear on where the system is actually currently failing folks who have money. Are they banned by ChexSystems or something?
I get it, "Bank the Unbanked!" is a compelling narrative, but folks seem not to be asking the relevant questions: (1) who are the unbanked exactly and (2) why aren't they banked - specifically - when there's a ton of banks out there, a bunch of which charge nothing.
Re: Why Web3?
#566Earlier quoted context omitted.
Actually you can’t know it was by an ‘owner’ because nfts are not tied to the real world. You own nothing but the digital signature. There are so many problems being skated over here about provenance and ownership and nfts provide nothing of value in that domain, they’re just a get rich quick scheme.
> because nfts are not tied to the real world. You own nothing but the digital signature. The digital signature is thing that people want to own in the real world!
And yet all the talk is not about the signature, but the thing it refers to. Why is that distinction constantly elided? Is it because the digital signature has no value on its own?
Re: Why Web3?
#567I'm not convinced. People talk grand about "permissionless data" but I fail to see any practical applications. NFTs are a scam and are retroactively obsoleted by digital signatures. All of the ideas about logistics tracking, deed tracking, etc etc are all rendered pointless by the oracle problem, you can get identical guarantees with digital signatures minus the blockchain. DeFi is DOA. Gas fees are insane, "layer 2"…
What are your thoughts on Ethereum sharding and proof of stake for scaling transactions and lowering costs?
Re: Why Web3?
#568Earlier quoted context omitted.
Talent is pouring in because free money is gushing out from the mother of all bubbles. Enjoy it while it lasts.
Talent doesn't have problem making money, talent is attracted to interesting problems and id attracting the money. Wonder at what point you will concede that you are wrong about this if 13 years isn't long enough to prove its not a bubble.
> Talent doesn't have problem making money
No where else in my career have I seen senior level engineers earn 7 figures.
> talent is attracted to interesting problems and id attracting the money
First part is fair, top engineers are passionate about solving challenges.
Second part not so much. How can you explain that “interesting problems” is an efficient capital allocation strategy?
Money is interested in making more money. Here’s an alternate hypothesis: Every few decades a bubble appears. VCs which know their history dust off their bubble playbooks and enter close to the ground floor. But this time is different because they also got to dust of the century old playbook on unregulated financial markets.
> 13 years isn't long enough to prove its not a bubble.
Your argument is upside down. BTC has had 13 years and is complete failure. ETH came out 6 years ago but so far the DeFi space has not provided a single useful application that touches the real economy. Today we have a basket case of post-ETH decentralized compute and storage platform options that have not produced a single killer app.
Your argument is upside down. If ETH had launched in 2020 instead of 2015, we could argue for more time to try out a product market fit. But the more years of r&d without a killer app, the more confidence that it’s a bubble.
Re: Why Web3?
#569Earlier quoted context omitted.
> I've never met a single person who had money but couldn't get a bank account* - have you? I don't agree with defi but this is absolutely a problem in a lot of rural america. People with money, who get paid, but without a bank so they have to take their checks to gas stations who take huge fees. That you haven't met someone like this isn't surprising at all.
Why can't they open an online checking account like Ally which will allow them to deposit a photo of their check free of charge? My understanding is a lot of low-income folks have smartphones as desktop replacements. Is this not a strictly better solution than anything in crypto? I'm also open to postal banking as a solution to this problem, but I'm not really clear on where the system is actually currently failing f…
Many banks, both historically and presently, have pervasive and capricious fees that disproportionately impact people with less money. Both because those fees are large relative to the amount of money they have, and because those fees arise in situations more likely to occur with less money (e.g. overdraft fees, policies that intentionally do withdrawals before deposits to cause overdraft fees, minimum balances, ATM fees, and many others).
And furthermore, the institutions more likely to be friendlier to customers with less money are sometimes also institutions on a smaller scale that may have a harder time offering some of the services of larger institutions (e.g. branch/ATM locations, compelling variety of credit and account instruments, investment arms, better online banking experiences).
To the extent this is changing, it also has to change in people's perceptions, in a fashion that makes it easier to predict and feel confident in.
Re: Why Web3?
#570I'm not convinced. People talk grand about "permissionless data" but I fail to see any practical applications. NFTs are a scam and are retroactively obsoleted by digital signatures. All of the ideas about logistics tracking, deed tracking, etc etc are all rendered pointless by the oracle problem, you can get identical guarantees with digital signatures minus the blockchain. DeFi is DOA. Gas fees are insane, "layer 2"…
> NFTs are a scam and are retroactively obsoleted by digital signatures I'm not one to ever defend NFTs, but this is not right. Suppose I bought an extremely trendy natural number k ∈ ℤ and I have a signature σ from its inventor that says "doomrobo owns k". Suppose in a year the trend has passed and I'd like to sell k. How do I transfer ownership to someone else? Clearly sending σ doesn't suffice, since σ is public.…
You create a new signature signing a message saying you transferred this. The important bit here is some public immutable record. If this happened on Ethereum, and Ethereum ceased to exist, then your NFT would cease too. If you used say a archive.org snapshot then your NFT would live as long as archive.org servers are up.