I also remember from the lecture by Dan Boneh, cryptography professor from Stanford, that Blockchain is slower and more complex than a centralized system. So it may be more expensive than off-chain banking systems.
The main advantage of blockchain, of course, is that it can operate where no one trusts a single party. But most people trust banks.
I think the crypto community should look for areas where there's no single trusted entity or where this trust has been broken.
I think the elephant in the room that everyone ignores at their own peril is that technology doesn't exist in a vacuum - politics matter greatly. And many of the goals sought by defi and cryptocurrency are anathema to sovereign governments everywhere (from China to the US). In other words, they simply won't allow much of this to happen because it means the loss of control (over fraud, over taxation, over money, etc).
The technology is compelling, but my bet is that it will be partially co-opted by banks and governments to make the system run faster and more efficiently, without giving up the control and intermediation that currently exist( and in fact may increase it).
See how China co-opted certain technologies with their e-RMB digital currency for an example of where I think things are progressing towards
> The paywalls are about to come down everywhere. It's going to suck, and there will be many careers cut short and much value wiped out.
> But the destruction will be creative because the crypto-powered creator economy will distribute the rewards of good work to many more individual creators than our current, centralized system.
Why doesn't the first phenomenon undermine the second? Doesn't crypto's presumed ability to drive the price of digital goods to near-zero via a resale market work the same way for the creator economy?
I find this critique of crypto-everything quite convincing: https://www.currentaffairs.org/2021/04/why-cryptocurrency-is-a-giant-fraud
Indeed, with China's ban (at least I'll finally be able to get a new gpu for my gaming rig, maybe? https://futurism.com/the-byte/china-bitcoin-market-gpus) and India looking to try and follow suit (https://www.barrons.com/articles/bitcoin-future-51625156640), I'm still betting crypto is more Segway than Automobile--an interesting niche thing but not something that revolutionizes the world.
His argument doesn't really address defi and trust scaling which I think is the big feature over things like privacy and security.
Can you say more on this?
I also remember from the lecture by Dan Boneh, cryptography professor from Stanford, that Blockchain is slower and more complex than a centralized system. So it may be more expensive than off-chain banking systems.
The main advantage of blockchain, of course, is that it can operate where no one trusts a single party. But most people trust banks.
I think the crypto community should look for areas where there's no single trusted entity or where this trust has been broken.
Thanks! I'm always into hearing counterarguments. I'll definitely check these out.
I think the elephant in the room that everyone ignores at their own peril is that technology doesn't exist in a vacuum - politics matter greatly. And many of the goals sought by defi and cryptocurrency are anathema to sovereign governments everywhere (from China to the US). In other words, they simply won't allow much of this to happen because it means the loss of control (over fraud, over taxation, over money, etc).
The technology is compelling, but my bet is that it will be partially co-opted by banks and governments to make the system run faster and more efficiently, without giving up the control and intermediation that currently exist( and in fact may increase it).
See how China co-opted certain technologies with their e-RMB digital currency for an example of where I think things are progressing towards
I just wish so many DAO advocates didn't believe that business would be so much better if we eliminated all the messy humans
> The paywalls are about to come down everywhere. It's going to suck, and there will be many careers cut short and much value wiped out.
> But the destruction will be creative because the crypto-powered creator economy will distribute the rewards of good work to many more individual creators than our current, centralized system.
Why doesn't the first phenomenon undermine the second? Doesn't crypto's presumed ability to drive the price of digital goods to near-zero via a resale market work the same way for the creator economy?