The following post by theSentryandtheVoid is being replicated because some comments within the post(but not the post itself) have been silently removed.
The original post can be found(in censored form) at this link:
np.reddit.com/r/ BitcoinMarkets/comments/a8s34v
The original post's content was as follows:
There are "use cases" for basically 2 or 3 blockchains:
Limited supply immutable ledger for transfer of value;
Smart contract environment;
Larger scale uncensorable data storage/access that can't be accommodated under 2.
That's it. If we get an efficient coin for each of those areas, there is no reason to have any others. If number 2 can reasonably allow for data storage without insane cost, then we only need 2.
Eeeeeeverything else is bullshit and just pollutes the system.
It's why we don't have 2000 email or DNS protocols. It would be a fucking joke. Like cryptocurrency currently is.
A: Hey I want to send you an email.
B: Oh sure, but you'll have to download this app from this shady website because I only use 3mail Cash (3CH). It's the real email.
A: Didn't 3CH just fork? Are you using 3CHAlphabetSoup or 3CHShitOnMyChest?
As soon as a coin appears to efficiently satisfy one of the 3 uses I describe, it will result in rapid mainstream adoption and clear the field for that use. First mover advantage instantly kills everything else off.
If there is a crypto that allows for free and easy and legitimate exchange of value under my first use case, every other value coin dies instantly. If I can pay my taxes and utility bills and a cup of coffee and a multimillion dollar international financing transaction with one coin (which is the only adoption result other than total failure), then I don't need any other coin, or any other currency ever again.
Likewise, if a coin 2 develops a robust and efficient architecture for smart contracts and it can interact smoothly with coin 1 to allow inroads and off roads for currency to move into the smart contact ecosystem, there's no need for any other smart contract system, and trying to have a minority ecosystem is totally fruitless. As soon as smart contracts can be utilized regularly for things like real estate transactions, mortgage funding, etc. as a regular operating procedure, it can become standardized and adopted everywhere.
Trying to have a second smart contract ecosystem just means the system is broken and everyone can't be a part of it. If there are two, they will become interoperable and indistinguishable over time, or one will dominate the other, just like coin 1 did in its space.
The general storage system in my third use case could be comprised of smaller competing chains, but in order to be secure (in the event it is being relied on for public land titles registries or medical records or citizenship documents), it will need to have the highest security. Small chains are of no value because they can't be secured against attack, so it will have to rely on the proof chain work of something at least mostly as big as chain 1 or 2. Whether it is actually a third chain, or whether it is a coordinated reference system built into chain 1/2 is still unclear.
I certainly can't say that I know which of the 3 are going to be.
The level of current adoption that any coin currently has is miniscule compared to what the endgame looks like. I hesitate to give it percentages, but let's just consider coin 1. What would adoption look like for it:
- ability to natively pay municipal, state, and federal taxes in a supermajority of nations;
- ability to quickly and easily accommodate 50%+ of global retail transactions as efficiently as current card systems;
- acceptance at all major and minor businesses and retailers: Amazon, ebay, steam, gas stations, coffee shops, Lambo dealerships, etc.;
- strong seamless user interface that hides all of the mechanical functions of the system;
- reliable ability to quickly transfer significant wealth worldwide either as adopted internally by the global banking system, or as a legitimate competitor (threat?) to it.
I would be very hesitant to say that we have reached a significant fraction of 1% on any of the above metrics. While BTC may be ahead of the other coins, the overall progress has been from 0% to very slightly more than 0%.
The real first-mover advantage will be seen when a system moves to 10 or 15%. At that point, I expect adoption to snowball and quickly move to near 100% essentially overnight. Or, it won't happen at all.
Same for Ethereum as a case 2 coin. It is currently the first-mover in the smart contract system, but it is nowhere near efficient or robust enough to satisfy global demand for the things it could be doing. Considering the most successful actual uses for ETH to date have betting apps, tokenized collectibles, and the DAI (which is basically another betting app...), it hasn't even staked out 0.1% of the possibility space.
As for chain 3, as I said, it may end up being incorporated to chain 1 or 2 through reference look-ups and semi-decentralized storage. I honestly am not aware of a solid project in that space. If you have any suggestions, I would be glad to take a look at them. The ones I have seen have been ETH tokenized systems that certainly can't reasonably scale with ETH in its current (or even proposed) forms.
Theoretically chains 1 and 2 could be a single chain, but I think the different efficiency incentives for 1 and 2 make that a lot less likely.
No comments:
Post a Comment