1/ Contrarian opinion: For utility tokens most of the value will be in the application layer, not in the protocol layer. Let’s take Ethereum as an example:pic.twitter.com/p34RFIbwzp
You can add location information to your Tweets, such as your city or precise location, from the web and via third-party applications. You always have the option to delete your Tweet location history. Learn more
(1) Yes, I think the application software be very specific & mostly closed-sourced and (2) I wouldn’t call it rent-seeking. It provides value by making tedious processes more efficient (eg notary services above). About middlemen: It’s ‘and’, not ‘or’, imo.
A proliferation of entirely Closed-source services may or may not be palatable to users in the era of the blockchain, tbd.
That’s what I think will happen, based on the incentives for one versus the other. Not necessarily what I hope for. Btw, the open-source vs closed-source isn’t the biggest factor, I think. It’s switching costs.
Do you think switching costs from one prediction market dApp to another prediction market dApp would really be such a big deal? Especially if, e.g. if one charges 2% and another charges 1%? or one is closed-source vs. another is open-source? Cryptocommunity places premium latter
Both of these statements are true for the protocol level as well. I also disagree. Open source dApps could be very costly to fork. Probably more costly than the protocol layer due to user stickiness.
Just because I have all of the code to Facebook, doesn't mean that my new version of Facebook is as valuable as the incumbent. There are huge UX moats at the application level.
Really depends on the level of the rent-seek. If it's excessive, the decentralized nature of blockchains will figure out an alternative. I actually believe the future are dApps with a very low rent-seek that society/the market finds acceptable
I mostly agree. But I the subject of this discussion is the relative value between the dApps and the SC platform. The amount of value built on a platform will exceed the value of the platform, unless it becomes a SoV.
^the big question is can you have a blockchain worth $300B hosting $1T worth of value? Not to mention the fact that PoS systems need to be highly valuable (i.e. SoVs) to be highly secure.
That is exactly why I believe the Bitcoin blockchain (most secure and reliable) will be the blockchain for valuable transfers and smart contracts (via RSK or Multilayer)
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.