i can't wait for the appcoin narrative to die. the idea that a "decentralized" network with its own proprietary friction-token will somehow beat out a centralized network with several widely accepted and readily available forms of payment is a techno-utopian myth at best.
-
-
Replying to @Melt_Dem
Tokens can be a valid form of resource allocation within protocols that should be decentralized, like BitTorrent. Researchers and builders tried to figure out how to add decentralized currency to p2p in the 2000s. A token would legit improve BitTorrenthttps://medium.com/@jbackus/what-if-bittorrent-had-a-token-13d62a590aa7 …
4 replies 0 retweets 8 likes -
I think it's important that the token isn't doled out by some central authority though. That's how most of these appcoins seem to work
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @CharlesElegans @Melt_Dem
I think it is important that tokens in this example be semi-controllable by the creator in the beginning so they can incentivize adoption & figure out the token mechanics. I'm not saying anything about crowdfunding, just the ability to kickstart network effects
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
The need for initial central control seems exactly like the point. If you can only do a successful decentralized service by starting centralized and weaning off, why try to decentralize at all unless it's just a marketing gimmick?
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
For the same reason that startups don't build v1 of their product and then just call it a day. Building things that work well requires a lot of experimentation and I think decentralization should be a gradual process that fits this.
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.