221–230 of 235 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yes, because both BTC and ETH are well known for how cheap transactions are.
Typically less than half a percent, often lower.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
In the exact same way that blockchain does - you present a token that can be validated by your peers. However, in blockchain it's the combo of your private key to sign your wallet, along with the consensus engine where decentralized voting decides to accept the generation and association of new tokens. In centralized servers, it's the combo of your credentials to login, along with the servers that update the database…
> In the exact same way that blockchain does - So if i have a software licence and i want to exchange it for a concert ticket that a stranger doesn’t need anymore, where precisely do i go, today, to make this happen? What’s the app name or the website i go to? Because i know exactly where to go to exchange NFTs, in a secure, configurable and trustless manner. > That's purely business logic Call it whatever you want,…
This doesn't even make sense for most chains since software licenses generally depend on some sort of secrets or drm that can't work on transparent chains (anyone can look at the tx and impersonate the owner to grab an activation code).
The actual product and ecosystem of these things is the hard part. You can't actually do anything at all with NFTs because they are merely mappings of users to random strings.
They have absolutely zero utility in and of themselves. Not as rights to jpgs and certainly not as proof of concert ticket ownership.
The business logic is what makes it all actually work, and can be applied far more easily in centralized systems.
Again, the usefulness in Blockchain is not authorization tokens, it's decentralized consensus, which is only useful insofar as you distrust the centralized alternative.
The auth token itself, whether NFT or any other bearer-like, is neither innovative nor interesting nor inherently useful. It only becomes useful where decentralization is useful and compelling products use it for practical needs.
I'm repeating myself now, no point in beating a dead horse.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You misunderstood what I said. Let me repeat: > that gives added functionality. Everything is governed by DAO. Interop can be voted in What I mean by functionality is _actual_ functionality. Like, I earn a shield in one game and now it lets me deflect hits with new animations in another, so the DAO would need to vote in code changes. This is what I meant by interop too. Not being able to see JPGs that you import acro…
> What I mean by functionality is _actual_ functionality. Like, I earn a shield in one game and now it lets me deflect hits with new animations in another Yes, literally how Illuvium games work. Eg in the mobile city-building game you build factories that extract minerals, which are then available either to trade with other players or to use in the desktop MMORPG as materials to forge weapons.
Like for example if these materials let you build new kinds of structures in Fortnite, if Fortnite were controlled by a DAO, which also implies that the code is running on-chain, because who owns the keys to upload to the Microsoft store etc.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
« The “electronic cash” envisioned by Satoshi is cash; it is not notes, scrip or bank credits. We have come to think of bank notes as cash, but they are actually contracts for debt. The note holder is owed something by the issuer. Cash is a commodity with certain properties that make it useful as money. Cash is largely gone from the world, and people cannot return to physical commodity money, as it cannot be moved on…
> Bitcoin is really our only option to guard against inflation, counterfeit, capital controls and high costs in general. Cash (and Bitcoin) are just as vulnerable to inflation as traditional currencies. If oil is more scarce, the cost of all oil-based goods will increase, regardless of whether you can mint more BTC or not. Not that it would be any serious difficulty to increase the supply of BTC either - it's ultimat…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Probably that it’s very centralized. Or at least that the price is able to be highly influenced by a few individuals/groups.
>Probably that it’s very centralized. Or at least that the price is able to be highly influenced by a few individuals/groups. The article and the parent comment are about Ordinals. Your comment appears to be an opinion about Bitcoin the asset and/or network itself.
> However, we notice that by spending only 0.005% of the total Bitcoin supply on transaction fees, a single entity can significantly impact the entire Blockchain regime.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Imagine if Visa and Mastercard formed a duopoly and used their market power to extract fees from merchants to the point of warranting government action to cap the fees.
...and that still got to lower prices than bitcoin transactions Wild, isn't it ?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Bitcoin is really our only option to guard against inflation, counterfeit, capital controls and high costs in general. Cash (and Bitcoin) are just as vulnerable to inflation as traditional currencies. If oil is more scarce, the cost of all oil-based goods will increase, regardless of whether you can mint more BTC or not. Not that it would be any serious difficulty to increase the supply of BTC either - it's ultimat…
Bitcoin is immune to hyperinflation. Can you refute that?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's the new money, I mean it's an investment, I mean it's a store of value, it is a tech backbone for web 3.0, it is an online deed... Soon they will find something it is reaaaally good at. Might solve some prime number conjecture by accident if they solve enough sudokus, I mean hashes.
You make some great points. Money, investments, banks, programmable money, decentralized organizations, VC where investors don't need accreditation (great for the little guy, bad for the 1%), deeds, remittances, prediction markets. Even capturing a fraction of a fraction of those would be a massive. I used it quite a few times lately to pay open source contributors in countries that don't have access to Paypal. Paid…
I am sad to hear that. I was mocking the crypto attempts to legitimise their business proporisiton. All of them have failed, because fundamentally their product does not solve any real problem and once it interacts with the real world it has the same problems as those industries have.
Essentially crypto is like most libertarian communities, they eventually end up inventing regulations, governance and many of the same systems that we currently have, but only after fucking up themselves.
> Even capturing a fraction of a fraction of those would be a massive.
The risk of fraud outstrips any of the advantages, also the risk of lack of regulation on the financial system has brought us great hits like the 2008 banking crisis.
Giving VC access to anyone based on crypto is gonna be a gold rush of fraud, To the Moon tm slogans and other nonsense that will bankrupt as many people as possible before imploding.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
A problem to solve? It is not uncommon for companies to loose over 2% of revenue in banking fees and other enforced banking inefficiencies for transactions that could be handled much more cheaply and efficently with crypto solutions
> not uncommon for companies to loose over 2% of revenue in banking fees and other enforced banking inefficiencies Do you have a source for that number? And even forgetting that "crypto" comes with both delays and transaction fees, it is also known to be able to lose most of it's value basically overnight. So unless companies want to wake up bankrupt, they'd have to constantly change real money into tokens and back a…
crypto delays are minutes to hours. banking delays are a matter of days. just this week i needed to do a significant transfer with my bank. because i did the transfer after 16:30 (in branch!) i needed to wait until 06:00 for the transfer to happen because it was outside transfer hours. if some crypto coin functioned like this it would be laughed at