The entire debate of SOV ($BTC) vs. utility ($ETH) #cryptocurrencies relies on the assumption that utility coins can't also be SOV/neo-gold.
But of course--they can!
External Tweet loading...
If nothing shows, it may have been deleted
by @arjunblj view original on Twitter
2/ Many coins share the same fundamental properties of neo-gold. Let's call these "FPs". The exact FPs are not universally agreed upon but typically include the following:
3/ Many cryptos share these FPs so belief in coin X becoming neo-gold then is a bet that:
A) it scores best among these FPs
B) it will always score best
C) other properties--such as utility and on-chain scaling--either don't matter or worse detract from these FPs
4/ There are issues with all of these beliefs:
A -- These FPs are not binary so scoring them is complex. E.g., there's no consensus on how to measure decentralization.
5/ B -- No coin has completed its roadmap (and updates will continue for many years) so a bet on coin X is a belief that it will continue to score highest across all FPs for the foreseeable future. This is of course unknowable.
6/ C -- Sorry but I believe that utility (and network effects) and scalability increase the value of a neo-gold/SOV. A truly global neo-gold needs more on-chain throughput than 7 tx/s if for example we want it to remain self-sovereign (otherwise custody is forced off-chain).
7/ To sum in laymen terms, this is simply a debate of neo-money vs. neo-programmable-money.
There are many smart people on both sides of the debate. And this is further reflected by the market caps of the top neo-money ($BTC) and neo-programmable-money ($ETH) coins.
8/ So to expect that heterogeneous human beings who can't decide between Laurel and Yanny will swiftly converge on a champion given all the uncertainty discussed above is naive. It's simply too early to place a *maximalist* bet IMHO. And the market reflects this.
9/ I plan to write on this in a lot more detail in the coming weeks so stay tuned. This debate is far from settled and fun to be a part of!
1/ Hey #CryptoTwitter, grab a glass of vino and come sit by the fire so we can discuss your narrow-minded views on FAT PROTOCOL THEORY.
See what I did there -- how I juxtaposed "narrow" with "fat"?
No?
Just shut up and drink your wine. 👇
2/ First, let's acknowledge it as a "theory" even though it wasn't clearly labelled as such.
A theory is just a plausible principle offered to explain phenomena.
3/ In Joel's case -- @jmonegro penned the original theory -- he was observing the phenomena that #Bitcoin and #Ethereum both had market caps that far exceeded the value of applications built on top of either protocol.
- #Ethereum code school CryptoZombies trained 208k+ users and is growing by 30k+/mo
- Truffle has 580k dls, up 56% last 3 mo
- MetaMask has >1m users
- GitHub lists 14k $ETH-based repos and 220k commits
- 1500+ dapps are in dev
/1
- ETH does more tx and active addresses than BTC
- No, batching doesn't make up the dif in tx
- Of the top 100 tokens by MC, 94% are built on Ethereum
- EEA boasts 500+ members
- Brazil, Canada, Zug, Chile, Dubai, and Estonia are experimenting w/ government apps on Ethereum
/2
On the topic of daily act addr (DAA):
Value transfer is a use case and those *transacting value daily* are DAUs you morons.
Fundraising with $ETH = MOE.
By DAA, Ethereum has as many or more users than BTC.
- Crypto has rekindled the debate about whether advances in IT can render central banks obsolete
- Author: "To fend off potential competitive pressure from crypto assets, central banks must continue to carry out effective monetary policies"
Whaaat!?
3/ Current state:
- For now, crypto assets are too volatile and risky to pose a threat to fiat
- And they do not enjoy the same degree of trust that citizens have in fiat
- However, continued innovation and longer track records may reduce volatility and boost adoption
1. Most usage for all crypto today is value tx due to speculation. Same for $BTC as for $ETH. 2. Value tx is a use case! Expecting early SC platforms w/out mature dapps to have dapp users is like asking why LN isn't being used yet for payments?
External Tweet loading...
If nothing shows, it may have been deleted
by @BMBernstein view original on Twitter
3. On-chain tx vol has dropped likely b/c of chilled ICO environment (+ market crash). Can't ignore the broader market contexts. 4. "Next few months" are likely meaningless in terms of competition. New chains need to launch, attract devs, launch apps, etc. Next 12+ months maybe?
5. Indeed, capital raise as a use case will see swifter competition but network effects, security, trust, token standardization, liquidity (fiat pairs) are still barriers that may not be easily overcome.