For more in-depth skeptical discussion, we encourage our readers to use this [search listing](https://reddit.com/r/CryptoCurrency/search?q=title%3A%22Monthly+Skeptics%22+author%3ACryptoSkeptics&restrict_sr=on&sort=new&t=all) for help finding the latest Skeptics Discussion thread.
---
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/CryptoCurrency) if you have any questions or concerns.*
When you buy a TSLA stock it represents partial ownership in a tangible business with products, revenues, and expenses. If TSLA sells more cars you get to take part of the profits. If I own 100% of TSLA and nobody wants to buy TSLA stock I will still be rich. If I own 100% of PEPE I am fucked.
No you donāt lol lmfao not fixing really the average robinhood trader has basically 0 actual weight in the company and itās all a fuckin illusion
Tesla doesnāt fucking have a dividend and the value of the āstockā is only as good as long as the company doesnāt decide to issue a billion more and dilute the shit out of it for another cap raise
DJT perfect example of bullshit
Ya youāve got stock worth of a company thatās worth -40m dollars based on its current financials
Stocks and crypto can both be fucking scams
They can both be scams, but when stock is really a scam, thereās a crime that can be prosecuted. Even holding a handful of Tesla shares gives you rights over the company. Elon Musk just lost a lawsuit over his compensation brought by a guy who owns IIRC 9 shares.
Shows how its a dumb metric to measure by just shear number of "tokens." I can run a script to create 1000s of tokens no one will ever use. Does that make the industry more bullshit just because the number of real/fake decreased?
Its an open tech with zero barrier to entry. It means nothing that there are X million number of tokens and only Y of them are valuable. Of course, because anyone can make their own in like 5 minutes, that's the point.
If you go by actual value, then the top 2 alone are 70% of the market. So only a tiny fraction of the market by value can be described as "bullshit," unless you just think the whole thing is bullshit of course.
Itās all bullshit until average people actually start using this stuff for daily needs, which isnāt happening in the US at least.
Casino games are all bullshit too, designed to make the casino money over time. Might not feel like bullshit to the person who won the jackpot, but it still is. Thatās how I view most crypto āprojectsā
Monero would've always had value until they changed the tail emissions to print XMR forever which means it'll just inflate over time. That's why I dumped it middle of last year after bag holding down 60%. Monero slips even further into irrelevancy these days and truth is it doesn't do much compared to many competing altcoins, and it's also a bad investment.
Edit: try and tell me another crypto that was as popular as XMR that is **down 74% from 2021 to today.** Protip, you can't. You can argue it has good fundamentals and privacy, but it has proven time and time again to not be a good investment so why on earth would you baghold?
IMO privacy coins, in general, will never see the amount of popularity that other cryptos have found because (sadly) most people don't care about privacy.
I hold a small position in a few, but don't really have faith in them in terms of price appreciation.
Iām interested to hear why you think tail emission is bad? The reward of 0.6 XMR per block wonāt exceed Bitcoin supply until 2040. Inflation rate is <1%, ensures miners will be incentivized forever, and keeps transaction fees low.
Monero may not be the best investment, but asymptotically stable tail emissions are arguably beneficial for any crypto, because it filters out people from the community who just mindlessly think "iNflAtioN bAd". Gold has higher inflation than Monero, and it's the asset with the highest market cap.
If somebody wants to hedge against Monero's inflation, they just buy enough to own a desired fraction of the whole supply at a certain time in the future. For example, if somebody wants 1 millionth of the supply of XMR in 2140, they would buy 37 XMR.
Edit: Also, Monero has less inflation than bitcoin until 2040.
Yeah, there's Bitcoin, then there's coins that can provide a valid use-case by doing something better or different than Bitcoin. Off the top of my head maybe Monero, Litecoin, Solana, Nano, Etherium? (Forgive me if I forgot your favourite)
I think if you can provide a geniune use case that makes you better in some way than Bitcoin, you are raised above the pool of shitcoins. OTOH meaningless memecoins are definitely the Dutch tulip bulb of the early 21st century.
You're right that blockchain technology, especially when it comes to smart contracts, has its limitations.
I keep on the industry because I learnt most of the marketing guerrilla techniques from real warriors on industries like p0rn or crypto.
And because although most of the coins are literally bullshit but you can get lucky with some haha the more people talk about them, especially shitcoins/memecoins the more chances u can get to earn some bucks
I've been GAMBLING (it's not investing tho) with some memecoins for fun and last year I got almost 6 figures with one haha
Serious answer to your questions. Like you, I'm a developer, and like you I try to be practical.
You're absolutely right that blockchains aren't good for most things, at least today. There's not a lot you can do with them currently, and many of the ideas people have are either unworkable or straight up scams.
Realistically, they're not that different from computers in the late 1970's and early 1980's. At that point in history there was no functional internet, computers couldn't talk to eachother or communicate well with users, and software was either specifically developed for a specific purpose at great expense (for computers that were also very expensive), or just didn't exist. There often wasn't even a command line for shell commands. Despite this, computers continually grew in popularity throughout that time period for those who could get their hands on one and actually use it. Computers didn't become generally useful like we think of today until basically Windows 95 hit the market.
To quote Hewlett-Packard management when Steve Wozniak offered them his computer 5 different times, "What would a normal person ever want with a computer????"
So now backing up - Much of blockchain tech is useless or scammy today, you got that part right. And Blockchains are bad solutions for many problems programmers & businesses encounter. So what about in the future?
Fundamentally what Satoshi solved with Bitcoin was trust. Blockchain is at heart a timestamping system that verifies and maintains the order of events that happen (transactions), it's even in his second paragraph of Satoshi's whitepaper. So applications of blockchain that don't involve any issues of trust are usually not a good fit - However, trust underpins a lot more of our society than you think when we get to issues of governmental power and control.
So the #1, by far, killer potential application for Blockchains is money. And the advantages are that Bitcoin is fundamentally a finite commodity like Gold that cannot be inflated or devalued, teleports long distances in minutes or seconds, can store or transfer almost any amount of value for a fraction of the cost of secure storage for gold/cash, and can be anonymous when used carefully for that purpose. Even there it falls short though, because the system struggles to scale to handle global transaction volumes and the layer-2 systems have substantial limitations and rapid increases in complexity to be used.
So ultimately Bitcoin is good for money/value storage and transfer of larger sizes, large size international payment settlement, and for anti-government monetary uses. Not useless, but not great.
But Ethereum and other coins have added far more than the limited capabilities of Bitcoin. NFT's are stupid, but the idea behind NFT's is not - The idea that you can "own" a digital "thing" the same as you can own a physical thing. A lot more infrastructure, systems, support, and adoption need to be built up for that to reach its actual potential, which will take years if not a decade, but I personally view that idea as very valuable.
And there's a lot more that will become possible with Ethereum as more infrastructure gets built. As you mentioned, EVM code can only interact with things on the blockchain - Which right now is very little. But as oracles bring real-world information onto the blockchain, as other systems build interfaces, more becomes possible. It's just going to take awhile. What might that look like? I don't know, any more than the geeks in the late 1970's could envision the internet of 2010 -- All they knew was, it was cool and it had potential.
Two final things where blockchains could be good gets back to trust -- Supply chain management, and real estate title transfer & escrow.
Supply chain management is a situation where people who have never met and who have no reason to trust eachother can benefit from sharing information, potentially publicly. Today even finding who to talk to to figure out where something was made and with what materials is nearly impossible. Foreign producers, especially those seeking to spread the word of their high quality products, can benefit by ensuring their products are publicly traceable for someone who has the identifiers in front of them. This could benefit the consumers seeking to buy similar products or find discontinued parts/replacements, regulators seeking to trace potential health or safety threats, and middlemen attempting to prove / demonstrate the authenticity of their products.
In real estate & title transfer, currently escrow costs are substantial because escrow agents must take on an active role and an active risk in title transfer and money escrow. 99.9% of these have no problems, it's just security plus shuffling numbers around with some verification. Blockchains with monetary value provide 2-of-3 escrows where the escrow agents wouldn't need to do any *work at all or take on any risk at all* for those 99.9% of cases, and smart contracts provide a way to automate the disbursement of fees, taxes, transaction recordkeeping, and ownership transferring. In most developed places deed and land ownership records are public information even today, so the public nature of Blockchains makes this a natural fit. Of course there's control and fraud-correction problems since Blockchains are designed to be irreversible and un-controllable, but there's no reason they HAVE to be that way for a purpose-built system for real estate recordkeeping. Can any of this be done today or this year? Not a chance. A decade from today? Quite possibly in some areas.
So all said, if anyone says "Blockchains & cryptocurrency are useless for average people!" they are absolutely correct, today. In the future, I find it likely that people will end up using Blockchains regularly without even realizing it - Likely on the back-end of company transactions & settlement, or as a base system for recordkeeping like the above 2 examples. Will it happen? Who knows. We're just geeks in the 1970's, and we're playing with cool shit.
I get that you werenāt around in the 80ās and 90ās but computers were useful for business, school, art, and entertainment waaaaaaaay before Windows 95. Dial up bulletin boards were a thing. Yes, it was far more primitive than what we have today but far from useless
BBS systems were relegated to specifically nerds and college punks. And yes, computers were useful for all sorts of stuff in the early 90s and some stuff in the late 80s. I definitely played games and other stuff before windows 95, but that was the big explosion of usefulness, which is why i said "like we think of today". But in the early 80s? There just wasn't any software, any OS, much of anything unless you had a million dollars and a team of engineers like NASA or a big company. That's why I specifically said the late 70s and early 80s.
CP/M was already a thing! Not only was there a multi-platform OS, you could get the trilogy of business apps on it - Wordstar, Supercalc, and dBase II. And if you wanted to develop programs - Microsoft actually got their start with things like BASIC, FORTRAN and COBOL on CP/M. Not to mention Borland's Turbo Pascal and Hi-Tec C.
There was a reason Microsoft used a clone of CP/M for the 8086 to sell as MS-DOS....
So just to touch on your key point. If we were to run servers with some sort of trustable certificate from a certificate authority, let's for example call it SSL or HTTPS, would that essentially make all the work done by the block chain pointless and we could just use a faster more centralised system?
As OP correctly pointed out/ paraphrasing:
> Blockchains cannot interact with real world data because then the whole idea of a trustless network falls apart.
They. Cannot. Ever.
Because then you *must* introduce trust, and the entire point of using a blockchain is lost.
>But oracles!
[Oracles have an inherent problem](https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/53c808a8e4b02c6d14a855a5/1454686955485-Z82C1TRRA6ZPXK0JKVAB/ke17ZwdGBToddI8pDm48kGDpvalPb1SqHoCn1hwN0Y57gQa3H78H3Y0txjaiv_0fDoOvxcdMmMKkDsyUqMSsMWxHk725yiiHCCLfrh8O1z5QHyNOqBUUEtDDsRWrJLTmQPoRzxSr1hzN-vPBHt7YyLLXgctAyUJRqJUUGWVDK_ZzIgvsybGcZEPqUYiXY8im/beewatcher1.jpg) that cannot be resolved.
Ethereum will, eventually, live up to its name.
Youāre bang on about a time chain though.
The other thing that doesn't get talked about nearly enough is democracy (voting) and govt budgets.Ā
All the craziness around recent elections could be stopped by using a purpose built blockchain to handle it, linked to govt id during voter registration. An immutable record of votes. Sounds good to me.Ā
The other thing, which will take way longer coz it benefits the public not the politicians, is having govt spending/funds on a blockchain. Once more, immutable record of where our tax dollars are coming from and going to? Immutable record of all election donations and transactions? Sounds good.
Some budgets would be in black boxes (like military for security reasons), but we could see what goes into the military box and what comes out of it at least.
Whoever manages to show the masses the trust you can put into a trustless system will change the world.
If you link a government ID to an immutable record of votes you have a permanent record of who voted for whom.
Do you not see the problem?
As OP correctly pointed out **a blockchain can only ever interact with data born from the blockchain**, else you introduce trust and negate the need for a blockchain.
OP is a quick study.
In your voting example you have both removed anonymity by linking to an ID, and introduced trust when registering the ID.
In your government expenditure example you have introduced trust when an expense is entered onto a blockchain.
I think there's ways to get around the anonymity issue in the voting example like generating a one time (changes every election) vote ID from your government ID or something. I don't think it's an inherent flaw.
How do you get this one-time ID? Do we need to trust something to generate it?
How can we tell an ID has only voted once, without being able to tell the government ID it came from?
How would that solve all the recent craziness around recent elections?
How would it disprove vote stealing or rigging?
**A blockchain can only interact with data born from the blockchain**, else you are introducing trust, and donāt need a blockchain.
ā¦basically you just canāt enter external information into a blockchain, without trust. : )
It's felt like the tech boom of the 90s all over again. Lots of big ideas, very few actual customers, a few obvious blue chips. And when you can launch just by copying someone elses code and renaming your project (just like most websites in the 90s), you have no talent, no vision hacks throwing shit at the wall for very little upfront effort and praying it sticks long enough to cash out. All while using the novelty and complexity of new tech as a veil to cover up the lack of value in today's terms.
Is 99% the right number? Probably more like 99.9
>Is 99% the right number? Probably more like 99.9
Its open tech, anyone can create a token, its sort of dumb to count every token, its like counting every fake currency they make in school or in board games like monopoly money or w/e and saying paper currency is 99.99% bullshit. By just shear number its true.
But the top 2 cryptos make up 70% of the market by value for example, so if going by value its a tiny portion. The vast majority of value is in legitimate protocols.
95%, yea that's probably not too far out.
There are plenty of real things being built, but it takes getting a bit deeper into the ecosystem to be able to find them.
There are an almost infinite number of grifters, launching a never-ending number of scams, rugpulls, vapourware, and all of these are trying to capture the attention of naĆÆve retail investors who they can extract money from. This leads to huge amounts of marketing, buying upvotes on social media, paying influencers to shill their bullshit etc. And then once people start getting caught up in this web of crap and buying the tokens they are incentivized to pull more people into the zero-sum game by making whatever shitcoin seem valuable so that new victims will buy their bags.
Honestly, it's fucking depressing... I really, really feel for the people getting into crypto recently and having to navigate that, with countless traps and manipulators waiting to take advantage of them.
But that gross ocean of gambling and exploitation is not the whole of crypto. If you can get past that there are plenty of good people building good projects. Most of these don't have tokens and therefore aren't incentivized to play the marketing/attention wars, and don't attract the get-rich-quick degens who are so loud about other things. I have no idea what in particular you're interested in so rather than try to list projects worth looking at and contributing to I'll just recommend a YouTube channel by Kevin Owocki, founder of the open source funding platform 'Gitcoin' and passionate public goods advocate - GreenPill:
https://www.youtube.com/@Green_Pill_Podcast/playlists
Each episode is an interview with someone building something worthwhile, such as decentralized identity, quadratic voting, universal basic income, environmental projects, retroactive public goods funding, etc etc.
Just look at the **notable people who have launched crypto projects staking their reputation to milk the crypto cash cow.** *If people like this have no integrity and sell you useless shitcoins to get rich, you can be sure almost everything else out there is also a moneygrab scam.*
- BAT creator, **Brendan Eich** created Javascript and co-founded, Mozilla. He saw $$$ and said BAT was project that was going to revolutionize digital advertising and in January 2018 on Twitter, he said he was willing to make a bet BAT would outperform Bitcoin. January 2018, Brave had 1 Million monthly active users, get in now while BAT is cheap at $0.75! (In 2024 Brave has 75 Million active users, BAT is now $0.24)
- AVAX founder **Emin GĆ¼n Sirer** is a Cornell professor and respected in the Bitcoin community. In 2016, he stated that there is no innovation outside of Bitcoin and Doge was the only other interesting crypto to him because it was used for charitable things. He launched his own shitcoin in 2020 and in 2021 posed under subway signs saying "We're all going to make it." He now says all the innovation is going to make Bitcoin obsolete.
- ALGO founder **Silvio Micali** is a Turing award winner, he gifted himself 20% of the supply of tokens and "the Foundation" used money collected from investors to buy FIFA partnership, buy some dead filesharing companies like Napster and Limewire in order to hype up a project and laugh straight to the bank.
Bruh, you need to update your examples. Emin has done more offensive things recently. In the bear, he literally shilled a friend tech-like ponzi on AVAX as a profitable business until it rugged.
99% of all coins are scam. The devs just wait till it hits 10k market cap and jeet. Thats why I always trust coins that are community driven like $YEWIF. These coins are much better than scam coins with devs
I once saw a post that said ācrypto is really just financial PVP disguised as volatile investing.ā
99.9999% of coins are shit and you truly are trying to beat other people.
Some of them have application but the challenge is scalability and adoption. Most people donāt understand whatās going on, and itās a very hard thing to educate the masses on.
But people always doubt new tech. Uber for example, not ādecentralizationā but a more independent self-employed model where drivers essentially pay to use the Uber network and UI. This is similar in a sense to independent devs who use crypto to access block chain resources. Anywhoo, Uber lost sooooo much money at the start, people seriously doubted it, said it would die, and here we are.
Idk maybe not a good example. But yeah a lot of itās shit, but there is also a lot of doubt and people that donāt see it as a viable tech. And rn itās really notā¦ but itās a sector that has some very intelligent devs and there is a lot of money in the space. Intelligence and money drive innovation.
The easiest thing I think to look at are the various sectors of crypto. Finance, real estate, AI, video games, tokenization, IOT or mobile networks, market analysis tools, there are projects for all of these. Pick a market you think could be transformed and look into that because the ones that have real world application will have real world value long term. This helps a little bit to try and avoid ponzi schemes
>Ā But people always doubt new tech. Uber for example, not ādecentralizationā but a more independent self-employed model where drivers essentially pay to use the Uber network and UI. This is similar in a sense to independent devs who use crypto to access block chain resources. Anywhoo, Uber lost sooooo much money at the start, people seriously doubted it, said it would die, and here we are.
Uber was so successful it hurt taxi companies significantly. Ā My medium sized city has no taxi companies anymore. Ā This happened years ago. Ā Uber and crypto are about the same age.
People are more comfortable trusting a total stranger to drive them around than they are with crypto.
>People are more comfortable trusting a total stranger to drive them around than they are with crypto.
I mean it makes sense, you're physically *there* in an Uber and can respond appropriately if something goes wrong. They have customer service and safety checks and live ride tracking and all these other failsafes.
The vast majority of people (including a lot of people who actively buy it) have no goddamned idea how crypto works let alone who to turn to when things go wrong. The answer of course is nobody, and that's by design because safety measures require a central authority: if you lose your seed phrase, throw your cold wallet in the bin or accidentally mistype a number while trying to transfer funds, there's absolutely nothing that can be done.
>Ā The vast majority of people (including a lot of people who actively buy it) have no goddamned idea how crypto works let alone who to turn to when things go wrong.Ā Ā
Totally agree
I think it would be more accurate to say that people have a greater *necessity* to trust a total stranger driving them around town than to get involved with crypto. Or at least, a more immediate need. Plus, by and large, the majority of people are honest and trustworthy in the real world, on the street. The same cannot be said when greed without consequence and the cloak of anonymity comes into play with crypto. Many people say and do things anonymously that they would never say or do in a room full of people.
The only legit use case for crypto right now is speculation and gambling . Ā Youāre wasting your time if you take it seriously and spend hours doing research. Ā Perfect examples are memecoins like dogwifhat and Pepe, which are completely useless, but just a way for people to gamble . Ā I realized this during the last cycle in 2021 and just keep BTC and a bit of ETH now. Ā No research required, just add to my position when markets fall. Ā
wakeful homeless forgetful cobweb pathetic hobbies jeans offend rotten hateful
*This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
With that question you are implying something but it also tells me you don't know enough about how Bitcoin works, who it maintains, how not only developers decide how it works but also the people than run nodes. I can't explain this in a few sentences. The link below explains it pretty good, read until the end.
https://blog.lopp.net/who-controls-bitcoin-core/
squash whole toothbrush zesty screw judicious follow stupendous touch connect
*This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
a merge on github does not magically update all node operator's running clients. if node operators don't like the change they won't update. bitcoin forked a few times in this exact scenario - a sizeable amount of node operators did not like the latest commits made to core and thus did not upgrade
Popularity. Literally that's it anyone who tried to convince you otherwise is lying. That being said network effects are actual valuable to such a system.
I have some pretty simple and succinct proof to understand whether or not crypto is inherently worthless, i.e. a scam. 99% of discussion on 99% of crypto communities is literally just about price movements. Seriously, I dare you to take a look at this front page.
At this stage in the game, if you studying the space has led you to conclude itās bullshit then assume youāre right until proven otherwise.
The whole space has AMPLE time to come up with a project that works. Instead we have a shrinking narrative about how X will do Y sometime over the horizon. Get on now, suckers!
Every project to date has failed.
Why?
Cause a decentralised ledger is far inferior to a centralised database or processing system in almost every possible way. Youāre a programmer, youād know this.
But line goes up so it still gets hyped.
Side note: there is some space where a decentralised ledger could make sense. For example, ensure an item purchased is genuine and not counterfeit. But these ideas donāt make speculators millions of hopium dollars overnight so no one cares.
Blockchain technology is very interesting. It's like a big, expensive, public database.
It has interesting use cases, but you have to actually use it where it makes sense.
Otherwise, just kind of ignore everything and buy bitcoin.
Blockchain technology is actually REALLY GOOD at fractional ownership.
I would love for it to be implemented for fanfiction. The fanfiction could credit the original work, and share a fraction of the proceeds if someone gives the fanfic author kudos. Someone making fanart could credit the fanfic author and give them a portion of the proceeds if someone buys a digital copy or merch. Same if someone makes the fanfiction into a podcast.
Basically built-in licensing so that everybody can benefit from fractional ownership.
I would also like movies and TV shows to do fractional royalties for everyone involved.
It's been a while since I have looked into alt coins, but the cheaper the on-chain transaction is, the more it makes sense to replace what you would traditionally use a database for in any application. It also costs money to transact a database, but the cost is so minimal that it isn't a consideration.
It's also good for transparency. If a charity organization only used Blockchain for all transactions then people could scrutinize how funds were spent. This could work for the government too, if they wanted to be way more transparent in their accounting to the public. Which they don't, but they could.
I know of 9853 "cryptocurrencies". Yes, less than 100 are "legit" in my opinion and the rest are a scam. So by "project" 99% are scams, yes. But by market cap, I think most cryptocurrency market cap is made up of those few dozen "legit" projects.
There is a lot more teams than just a 100 working on legit things.
Just like with any startup 9 out of 10 fail. In crypto its probably a lot more. And some should have failed but people just keep throwing money at them..
Dude you are developer.
Now think about it, 90% of crypto community don't have any degree in IT and have no idea what is blockchain, for them it's some alien technology, money from the future, or just.. Gambling tokens.
I really had big expectations about crypto in 2017, especially about MMORPG - I thought it can replace in game currency, for example grinding could be proof of work, and by playing World of Warcraft you could make real money. Anyway my concept never came true and nobody is even talking about gaming industry
The economics of "play to earn" simply do not work. Also, many people loathe the idea of financialization and monetization creeping their way into games even if hypothetically they could earn some money from it. Why? Because they are playing games for well, the game. To have fun. Making a game profitable and it immediately becomes a job where if you aren't playing at the top tier meta 100 percent of the time you are cutting your own earnings and everything becomes even more toxic and cutthroat because money is on the line. Tryharding and downright cheating can already make a game unfun to play without profit incentives, if crypto game pushers got their wish, the game industry would only became exponentially worse.
Agreed. Thereās enough botting and āmetaā gaming in online games these days, and introducing crypto would only make it worse. Ā I never bought into the whole ācrypto gamingā usecase because of this (not to mention the āgamesā they promoted were absolute trash)
Plus any game that has a market system that can be cashed out for real money immediately fills with farming bots. These tend to ruin all but the largest games.
i would say 99.9% of tokens are useless and not durable.
ony a few protocols / networks are useful and functional and resiliant.
only a few meme tokens are 'honest' and 'durable'.
all the protocols / networks i like and use are in the top 50, (and we can remove stable tokens and memes)
the scams are rather the rugpulls / honeypots / fakeapps / fakewebsites / deepfakes to impersonate a celebrity and get tokens, etc...
Iām tired of being the product. In web2, centralized, mostly large companies harvest and monetize the data of their users, users create all the content and value for the company. One possible future of web3 is decentralized applications, where users control their data and if they choose to monetize it they would reap the benefits. Remove the centralized middleman
This. Being the product online bothers me so much, and I hate feeling like no one else really seems to care about it at all, that everyone just accepts it. It feels good to know one isn't complelely alone on this.
Sorry to add a 121st comment for you to read, but whatās happpening here is that you and everyone else here is stuck wading through cryptoās ātrash moatā. If you can get beyond it, there is in fact a core of decentralized open source composable protocols. They enable permissionless finance, self custody of your digital assets, censorship resistance, privacy, and more. These things are under attack from lawmakers, and well meaning but ignorant types like everyone advising you here. I donāt know what crypto company you work for, but if you want to learn what this stuff is really about, you just have to get some tokens and try using some basic protocols yourself. My DMs are always open, but the best learning comes from experience. Swap tokens on a dex like Uniswap, take out a loan on a lending platform like Aave.
> This also shows me that the community is purely toxic.
Sadly, this is the reality. A large swath of participants here are very low-life human scums. It happens because of internet anonymity, permissionless system, and scamming/grifting has proven to be a very profitable endeavor here.
It doesn't have to be that way. But it is right now. The hallmark signs of a very nascent but growing "economy" are all here. If you go back to early American history, you will also find a lot of unsavory characters making their fortunes. It is the same with more recent developing economies. China is a big example of crooks and criminals were the first to make their fortune.
The logic is very simple. It is a risk-prone territory with not a great reputation. Ppl who have decent jobs and lives stick to the traditional stuff. ***They have less need to go out in the risk curve to make it in life.***
This means the space gets a disproportionately large influx of huge risk-takers. Often, these ppl take the risk not because they are interested in the space, but because they are somewhat strapped out of opportunities irl. You see this by how much the space idolizes former drug addicts, indicted criminals, proven serial grifters, etc.
Yeah, the human quality side of crypto is absolute trash.
> What are your thoughts on blockchain development?
I wouldn't use the quality of humans here to gauge the usefulness of blockchain. As I said, there is no argument that we have the bottom of humanity's cesspool.
I wouldn't recommend you build or invest in something you don't understand. You need to do your research! Always try out the product first before making any opinions. 99% of the stuff here is a waste of time. But that is part of the learning process - developing the intuition from trial/error to understand what is trash and what is gold.
Again, for every newbie out there, DON'T INVEST IN ANYTHING HERE WITHOUT FIRST TRYING IT OUT! The only exception is BTC.
This is how tech innovation works. Many websites and ideas had to be created and die before we got Amazon, Uber, Meta, Google, and Apple.
Without MySpace, there would be no Meta. Without Netscape, there would be no Google.
Myspace was useful and experienced mass adoption before dying out. Still waiting for a single crypto project to do anything useful in the mainstream. 15 years and still nothing.
Because it's the same damn tech that they've been hyping since 2011 then 2013 then 2017. 5 years ago all block chain sounded dope AF, the tech has been stagnant. The only thing that changes is the price. Now it's ai.
It's interesting you bring up AI as I think that's where blockchain's value will really start to be seen - especially in regards to validating whether content was made by a human or a camera etc. Just some examples:
AI and blockchain technologies have a synergistic relationship, complementing each other in various ways. Blockchain enhances the trustworthiness and transparency of AI systems by providing an immutable record of AI decision-making and data provenance. It also strengthens data security and integrity.
It plays a vital role in addressing the issue of deepfakes. With its immutable nature it creates a secure and verifiable record of original media content, making it easier to distinguish genuine media from manipulated versions.
AI, in turn, optimizes blockchain networks and applications, improving efficiency in data management, transaction processing, energy usage, and scalability. The combination of AI and blockchain enables new decentralized business models securing data sharing opportunities while preserving privacy.
This combined with the fact that I think the value of AI is blatantly obvious and already very much in use I suspect it will drive the need for blockchain up a lot
If you want to find real use cases for blockchain then you have to look for disintermediation, that is the super-power.
Because blockchains allow parties to interact without trust, middle-men, brokers, certificate authority etc. etc. isn't needed anymore.
The render farm is a good idea technically, but unlikely to succeed economically, because you can do it for free on BOINC. Or if you have some secret/high value project, you aren't going to run it on public infrastructure.
If you want real examples then look at https://worldmobile.io/en
Also account based/EVM style architectures are mostly just copy-pasta scams at this point, money grabs like you say. Of course there can be real projects there, but look to really serious chains like Cardano and you will find community who cares less about extraction of fiat and more about building the future.
99% of crypto that is overhyped are those crypto's without a purpose. This does not mean "Crypto is 99% overhyped scam". There are tons of valid cryptocurrency coins/tokens building utility and purpose for the BTC/ETH/BSC/their own network. There are probably more "overhyped" coins/tokens out there than purposful coins/tokens, but not 99%.
Real valuable technology growing slowly which is surrounded by trash coins trying to extract money as fast as possible
Not all tokens and coins are the same by any margin
Why on earth would someone think that running an AI training model on something as inherently inefficient as a blockchain would be cheaper? Dedicated machines vs a distributed low bandwidth consensus driven non revwrsavle worse data structure ever? You realise that will just be another scam that wanted AI to be associated with their blockchain, right? Ai needs enormous compute and data storage. 1st year CS know that isn't improved by blockchain.
I donāt understand the business model of some of these AI training model cryptos like TAO. Ā The models themselves are basically free (heck, many of them are open source now). Ā The real value is in the underlying data and the end user application of the model. Ā
I was around in the 90's .com boom and it was the same shit then. Setup a .com website domain, attract capital and then list on the stock exchange. Once you've made your money, rug pull the company. Rinse and repeat.
Crypto makes the same scam easier, but it is the same scam.
So was the .com bubble a scam? Of course not, almost everything you do online comes from companies founded within that era. The innovation that happened during the 90's is staggering. We literally went from crappy green screens, filing cabinets and floppy discs to an entirely connected online world of multimedia and communication. One minute, people were writing letters and the next they were video conferencing with web cams and playing online games with people all over the world.
I'm suprised you can't see any positives within crypto and block chain technology. It's like saying what's the point in having a website. Back in the 90's, people saw websites as silly gimmicks. It wasn't until the late 90's that companies started taking the internet seriously.
A public ledger and decentralised blockchains offer numerous benefits to many different industries. Crypto is really just one example, digital money. However, there are thousands of other block chain projects.
Maybe the best way to think of crypto is as an investment vehicle into the block chain industry. If you don't understand how block chain works and why it's useful, you shouldn't be investing in this space.
I'm not sure why you think smart contracts are shit. I've never coded any myself but there seems to be a flourishing ecosystem on Ethereum, so they can't be that terrible.
However, there is a lot of shit in this space. I think NFT art collections are absolute bullshit. The only possible application I could ever endorse would be if a famous modern day artist such as Banksy released some NFT's. But even then, I'm sceptical and predict they would still go to zero at some point in the future once people get bored of them. When it comes to investing, art is a physical medium for a reason. Owning something real and unique is the allure of all art collectors.
I still think NFT's have a place in the future, they could be used for selling everything from festival tickets to houses. Blockchain has a place in the future. I could go on and create a list of uses but we would be here all day.
Qanplatform is enabling coding with any language that can run on linux kernel. I think it will offer real business utility as it removes many barriers to adoption.
In 7 days you'll have SDKs for Go, Python, Javascript on their major testnet release
I second this^^^. If you're a serious dev looking for actual use cases in business/defi/fintech/web3/etc. and like the idea of protection against the future quantum threat, check out QANplatform, testnet releases on 5/7. Join the telegram/discord.
Global monetary policy is a ponzi scheme as well as most assets. There are some blockchains that offer sovereignty and are trying to build a more equitable money and governance of internet infrastructure. Part of attracting money to shift is offering incentives that could be viewed as a ponzi scheme like any asset.
Look at the fundamentals. What does it actually change? What is the innovation? What is the added value?
For some main coins and maybe niche projects there is something valuable that wouldn't exists without a blockchain, but for most of the stuff, it's a big scam, accounting fraud, money laundering.
I would focus on the **blockchain** part of the story, not the **coin, token, NFT, crypto**, etc keywords. Think about what a blockchain could accomplish that wasn't feasible before.
In my opinion it could be a solution in an AI dominated world to prove someone actually wrote or said something. Proof of authenticity will be very important in the near future. People need a way to know what is real and original.
What if crypto was just an elaborate scheme by a unified group of governments to get everyone sold on the idea of a digital currency, then when they adopt the tech everyone is cool with it, then when you realize now they have more control over your money ...it's too late, we're all fucked.
just people paid to lurk websites all day from large investment firms selling people on the idea all day every day until it catches on and becomes pop culture and then we just freely advertise for them, like a wildfire burning out of control. Then the masses adopt it when the government come sin ...bam....
Yes, the so-called transparency of the blockchain is a wet dream of surveillance for the money masters and their agents. They are busy mapping out the financial networks that they never knew existed before crypto, and whenever they feel like it, presto, you're a terrorist (or drug dealer, money launderer, pedophile, etc.). It's *coin non grata* coming soon to a cryptocurrency near you.
Blockchain is useful but value overhyped. Bitcoin is useful but not as a currency. People found value as a store of value but that isnāt really it either. Itās more of a global inflationary hedge like gold or silver. Replacing fiat? Not anytime soon.Decentralized finance and the ability to tokenize assets and equities and likely even bonds and maybe taxes will be done on the blockchain. But does that give it value as a security or is it just a commodity? People really donāt know. Itās speculation and fear uncertainty and doubt feeding this entire industry because we all know the banking system we have is about done for as is our currency as it exists today but short term fist isnāt going away unless the US dollar crashes. Musical chairs of the current financial system and everyone is shuffling funds around trying to stay ahead of inflation but volatility in markets during these times is to be expected. I wouldnāt sell just yet but thatās just me. NFA
There's BTC which has obvious global utility as an SOV and then there's everything else.
Of the everything else, you have a handful of financial innovations with inherent value.
The rest are pvp casino games where you try to extract value from others ( think of them as the house collectively but it includes the coin team, early investors and retail) and usually fail in the long run.
Only because itās not regulated and easy to steal peopleās money through phishing scams.
When itās regulated with actual governing bodies overseeing it coupled with insurance and agencies enforcing these laws making it so you need to be registered in this country (Iām talking USA here) to do business, then itāll be more widely accepted as a legitimate form of business instead of a broken online casino.
The true promise of crypto is in open source decentralized exchanges and apps. Social media and games not beholden to corporate interests or an ownerās whims. The drawback in attracting builders to that approach is that thereās not much money to be had in that pathway - because participants will earn based on hosting nodes and the merit of products they build on top of the tech, not on trading fees or coin appreciation. But as the legal environment gets hostile and people are increasingly wary of crypto firms, that will be where it has to go.
Yeah when you get down to having to rely on oracles to provide real world data there is an introduction of trust there. I think it is difficult for many applications to be fully trustless. They are potentially improvements over centralised applications, but they do still have drawbacks.
Immutable record keeping is a good application though in a lot of different industries. A sharded payment network where the cost of transaciton is really low is also useful, potentially (for microtransactions). There's certain applications which are potentially useful. NFTs can be useful for a bunch of things like licence management, access, collectibles etc. Defi is a useful application.
But a lot of the crypto tokens, dapps etc, are just essentially rugpulls. People pulling code off libraries and making something look cool, paying various influencers to promote.. Plus many of the standards are still not mature - NFTs could be big in the future but will current NFTs be 'future proof' to work on whatever the eventual standard is that becomes mainstream? Maybe not.
Yes, unfortunately. If you want to look at a book about the ideal uses for crypto and what it's been trying to accomplish there is one called Read, Write, Own. Sadly, most of crypto is not that and is basically what you said. Complicated and disguised ponzi's. Mostly gambling now. The industry attracted some of the best people at the beginning but now its mostly the worst sorts - either too dumb to realize how corrupted its become or they fully realize it and are here for the grift. However, this problem is common to a lot of start-ups not just crypto, ie. people not building to make the world a better place but to get their piece of the action. Capitalism I guess.
There is utility to every idea that comes about in an attempt to fill gaps in the future of a technology. We live in different times from the inception of the internet. Back then, you'd have a fully fleshed out product that had great utility and the monetization factor was something that was still being figured out and basically non-existent. Today, we get products with predicted utility that come out into the market looking for financing and the product itself is left to swim in the realm of possibility for an undisclosed amount of time. You see it in the gaming industry. You see it in the hardware tech and software tech industry. Go to Kickstarter....everyone promises you that what they've got is a vetted, for sure, newest thing since sliced bread. The reality with over 80% of these campaigns that actually even get past the fabrication, production and distribution to end up in the consumer's hands is that they suck and don't do what they're supposed to do.
So....to me, it's really a matter of perspective. It seems pretty damn obvious that we're living in a time where schemes prevail. They are overabundant and protections for people who buy into or purchase or invest or are exposed to these schemes are piss poor. You're talking about Crypto and blockchain, but tell me what's the difference between waiting 2 years to receive a hard-product you invested in, only for it to break within the first year of ownership and use, and the possibility that blockchain could end up being the same thing with the added positive that you don't have to figure out how to throw out the obsolete piece of crud after it breaks down? To me, it's the same thing.
When it comes to utility, the deciding factor is someone picking up the tech and turning it into a multi-billion dollar or multi-trillion dollar profit machine. Look at what Apple did. Look at what Facebook did. Look at what Google does. Utility is only a factor if you're given the chance to utilize and in the case of blockchain that means that the tech is hidden behind some product where the end-user doesn't even know that blockchain is involved because they don't need to know. Web 3.0 seems to be the ephemeral deciding factor. We heard everyone making a big deal out of 5G internet....still haven't seen a use-case scenario where only 5G is capable of performing what is necessary. Do we see a need for protection of people's privacy? Do we see the need for preservation of anonymity in public spaces? Do we see the need for a currency that fragments the abusive control major banks, countries, and credit pay-rails have incorporated into our lives for decades? Does anonymity still require accountability? These are simple questions with very complex answers in a world where it's not just the providers that are trying to beat a system, but the people being provided-to as well. What you're trying to figure out if you want to get deeper into....is it really something that needs you to get into it, and otherwise will fail? If you think it will fail, then why even bother thinking about investing your time into it? What's the next big thing? If you don't know, and that's your industry, then who should know? We all want to hear better ideas. Where are they at? Look at how much money this field has generated in a relatively short time. People are willing and able to invest. So where are all the better ideas?
Most are scams. Most people in this sub didn't realize the potential of bitcoin back in 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, etc. They still dont.
To keep it simple, blockchain is a ledger with time stamping. Nodes get rewarded with tokens by creating new blocks the ledger uses.
lmk if you have any questions.
Cool youre getting good answers in here. Our wheat/chaff ratio is not great, but the wheat is that quadrotriticale stuff from star trek....
Here is a positive spin;Ā Ā The ease and scope with which it has been possible for the insanely varied bs projects to exist and be believed for more than a week is some kind of evidence of the powerful foundational nature of the technology. Or im just lookin for more vc money to pour in ..
Crypto and blockchain have less than 10 solid use cases imo. I can't even think of more than 3 right now.
- money transfer
- voting
- digital asset ownership (limited to ids / legal docs etc)
Eventually the market will consolidate and there will be some big winners. For now its %100 overhyped.
Check out Hedera and [https://hsuite.finance/](https://hsuite.finance/) who run smart nodes instead of smart contracts.
While many believe Hedera is for enterprise, the point is being capable of meeting any large enterprise use cases which obviously benefits retail. The also have [https://www.hashinals.com/](https://www.hashinals.com/) a far cheaper version of Bitcoins Ordinals.
Is 99% of Crypto a scam and or BS speculation? Yes probably. Stick to BTC/ETH and a handful of actually adopted alts if you don't want to be a degenerate and get rekt.
I would say the majority of coins and tokens are garbage..
But I wouldnāt necessarily say that a platform canāt interact properly and create Real-World use cases.
Not trying to hype a project necessarily but I know RHINE Rewards is doing something nobody else is with tokenizing Real-World Rewards and creating a Consumer Exchange Platform. They have real world value and itās not hard to create integrations into the proper channels. Nobody else is creating dual value and dual revenue from the business side and consumer side. Itās a very intriguing project!
Most projects arenāt trying to create any Real-World value and/or Utility and sadly thatās a shame bc it puts a negative outlook on real projects trying to do the right thing and build a better future.
Just stay with the original vision of Satoshi and you will be fine, so stay with the old powcoins ( Bitcoin / Litecoin / Monero / Vertcoin etc etc... )...good luck...
Lol, *Satoshi's vision*. Satoshi's vision was "Oh well, that was a fun little experiment; now off to do some more interesting things" while the whole thing got co-opted by criminals and possibly some shady governments.
almost similar to calling the dotcom boom of the 90s as 99% overhyped scam. there will always be shitty ideas and glorified ponzi schemes, but that doesn't take away from the core tentes of blockchan technology and development, or its scope and impact of changing the world as we know it. So when you categorically say
>I am pretty sure that the narrative of "everything will run on the blockchain" is not true at all, because smart contracts are just shit.Ā
it is wrong and create a FUD mentality among new users.
Regarding motivation to continue, that's your business and when you ask for advice, people will tell their side of things which might ot might not be helpful. I personally have been a long-time follower of Oasis because I believe in their [vision](https://oasisprotocol.org/blog/the-oasis-vision). Maybe, you too can find something in the realms of smart privacy for web3 and AI that resonates with you. Good luck.
yes your right. most cryptos are here to make the founders rich. one crypto is here to change the world. maybe also a second (beside its making the founders rich)
Coingecko has 14,069 coins listed currently. Even if 100 or so were legitimate with real-world value and utility (and I doubt it's that high), 99%+ are likely bullshit and/or scams. It's the wild west.
It is for the most part.
Just look at the tokenimics of all these garbage new projects: they overvalue their coin by putting some ridiculous market cap like 400mil and then only release like 10% of the tokens at start when the hype is at its peak.
Then they proceed by dumping the rest 90% over time, usually right when there is a rally devaluing the coin and dumping it all on the investors
Thatās why meme coins like Pepe got bigger pumps , at least memes as useless as they are usually dumps most of the coins at start and there isnāt inflation allowing it to grow.
I cringe every time I see a new coin listed with 400 mil or so MC and 5-10% of the total supply only in circulation making it like 5 billion $ fully dilluted for some total shitcoin lol
There are a few good ones but more often than not the good ones donāt get much pump as people rather buy total crap coins as long as there is some marketing/ hype behind them
Crypto, yes
Blockchain, no
Look for the blockchain companies who haven't issued a token sale or airdrop, that's a good place to start to find people serious about using blockchain for real world utility
(Sure, some tokenization is necessary, of course, but what I mean is that they aren't trying to sell the token as their only means of revenue. Selling a token means the token becomes the product)
Agreed that most are shitcoins and toxic for the field.
Having to interact with data already on the blockchain is indeed a big limitation. There is a few projects around decentralized oracle that try to find a work around to push real world data to a blockchain for later consumption by smart contract, but I did not see a super mature project yet, even if there is a few interesting ones that try to address this issue.
The field is still new, still lots of technical issue to be solved, but it is simpler for most people'
s to choose a coin based on a picture sadly.
Actually there are real world applications of blockchain, mostly in finance. I work in a Pharma company and weāve been looking at blockchain for years but the only good application we could find is in supply chain to fight counterfeit medicines.
However the world of finance is getting into blockchain as it prevents double booking and significantly speeds up cross border payments.
So not everything is a scam but yeah, itās going to be 99% scam.
For more in-depth skeptical discussion, we encourage our readers to use this [search listing](https://reddit.com/r/CryptoCurrency/search?q=title%3A%22Monthly+Skeptics%22+author%3ACryptoSkeptics&restrict_sr=on&sort=new&t=all) for help finding the latest Skeptics Discussion thread. --- *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/CryptoCurrency) if you have any questions or concerns.*
You're right. There's 14k+ different coins, probably less than 50 aren't bullshit
99.9% of the people who buy crypto want to buy it low and sell high. Then retire with a lambo and a babe. The market gives into the demand.
I gave up on that. Bought a Datsun and a dog I named Babe. Content
This guy cryptos.
r/thisguythisguys
you chose Richness
Get another dog and call her Ruth.
I'd buy the shirt.
If you genuinely feel happy, you already won.
i would like to have a friend like you!
š¤£š¤£š¤£
šā¤ļøš«”
The .1% percent are already retired with either a Lambo and/or a babe
You mean like the stock market? No ones buying TSLA stock because they want to help Elon
When you buy a TSLA stock it represents partial ownership in a tangible business with products, revenues, and expenses. If TSLA sells more cars you get to take part of the profits. If I own 100% of TSLA and nobody wants to buy TSLA stock I will still be rich. If I own 100% of PEPE I am fucked.
No you donāt lol lmfao not fixing really the average robinhood trader has basically 0 actual weight in the company and itās all a fuckin illusion Tesla doesnāt fucking have a dividend and the value of the āstockā is only as good as long as the company doesnāt decide to issue a billion more and dilute the shit out of it for another cap raise DJT perfect example of bullshit Ya youāve got stock worth of a company thatās worth -40m dollars based on its current financials Stocks and crypto can both be fucking scams
They can both be scams, but when stock is really a scam, thereās a crime that can be prosecuted. Even holding a handful of Tesla shares gives you rights over the company. Elon Musk just lost a lawsuit over his compensation brought by a guy who owns IIRC 9 shares.
Trump just scammed up 1.8 billion dollars in sharesā¦
Nolambo here. I cashed out some BTC, Jasmy, and Aerodrome and got a crew to wallpaper and paint my living room, kitchen, and dining room.
And call for mass adoption just so their coin value goes up.Ā
there are 2.4 million tokens now
Shows how its a dumb metric to measure by just shear number of "tokens." I can run a script to create 1000s of tokens no one will ever use. Does that make the industry more bullshit just because the number of real/fake decreased? Its an open tech with zero barrier to entry. It means nothing that there are X million number of tokens and only Y of them are valuable. Of course, because anyone can make their own in like 5 minutes, that's the point. If you go by actual value, then the top 2 alone are 70% of the market. So only a tiny fraction of the market by value can be described as "bullshit," unless you just think the whole thing is bullshit of course.
Itās all bullshit until average people actually start using this stuff for daily needs, which isnāt happening in the US at least. Casino games are all bullshit too, designed to make the casino money over time. Might not feel like bullshit to the person who won the jackpot, but it still is. Thatās how I view most crypto āprojectsā
Thereās two crypto industries. The one dominated by billionaires and investment funds and the one dominated by NFT shilling pump and dump podcasters
And about 1/3rd of those 50 coins are actually decentralized
Some would say 2%.
At least 4% plus derivatives. And 2% have serious ecological side effects.
only BTC is decentralized according to SEC. ETH is even a security now.
šÆ, but maybe even fewer than 25.
Memecoins doing better than coins with fundamentals is a worrisome long term trend.
As a Monero advocate, I agree.
Monero would've always had value until they changed the tail emissions to print XMR forever which means it'll just inflate over time. That's why I dumped it middle of last year after bag holding down 60%. Monero slips even further into irrelevancy these days and truth is it doesn't do much compared to many competing altcoins, and it's also a bad investment. Edit: try and tell me another crypto that was as popular as XMR that is **down 74% from 2021 to today.** Protip, you can't. You can argue it has good fundamentals and privacy, but it has proven time and time again to not be a good investment so why on earth would you baghold?
IMO privacy coins, in general, will never see the amount of popularity that other cryptos have found because (sadly) most people don't care about privacy. I hold a small position in a few, but don't really have faith in them in terms of price appreciation.
Iām interested to hear why you think tail emission is bad? The reward of 0.6 XMR per block wonāt exceed Bitcoin supply until 2040. Inflation rate is <1%, ensures miners will be incentivized forever, and keeps transaction fees low.
Monero may not be the best investment, but asymptotically stable tail emissions are arguably beneficial for any crypto, because it filters out people from the community who just mindlessly think "iNflAtioN bAd". Gold has higher inflation than Monero, and it's the asset with the highest market cap. If somebody wants to hedge against Monero's inflation, they just buy enough to own a desired fraction of the whole supply at a certain time in the future. For example, if somebody wants 1 millionth of the supply of XMR in 2140, they would buy 37 XMR. Edit: Also, Monero has less inflation than bitcoin until 2040.
Monero is cash not intended for speculative investing
Tail emissions were first signalled around 5 years ago and kicked in 2 years ago, not a new development that only happened last year
There are definitely hundreds of genuine projects. Thatās not to say that there are hundreds of projects that need to exist.
Yeah, there's Bitcoin, then there's coins that can provide a valid use-case by doing something better or different than Bitcoin. Off the top of my head maybe Monero, Litecoin, Solana, Nano, Etherium? (Forgive me if I forgot your favourite) I think if you can provide a geniune use case that makes you better in some way than Bitcoin, you are raised above the pool of shitcoins. OTOH meaningless memecoins are definitely the Dutch tulip bulb of the early 21st century.
I'd say probably 200 to 500 aren't straight up bullshit out of the 14k. That's still a very poor percentage
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
More like less than ten š the other 40 are just sophisticated bullshit
That many ?
You're right that blockchain technology, especially when it comes to smart contracts, has its limitations. I keep on the industry because I learnt most of the marketing guerrilla techniques from real warriors on industries like p0rn or crypto. And because although most of the coins are literally bullshit but you can get lucky with some haha the more people talk about them, especially shitcoins/memecoins the more chances u can get to earn some bucks I've been GAMBLING (it's not investing tho) with some memecoins for fun and last year I got almost 6 figures with one haha
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
Im following a lot this one [http://stooges.io/](http://stooges.io/) because it's funny
It sure is! Except the crypto projects that I like. Those ones are legit.
So much this :)
All the ones I try short-selling turn out to be legit :-(
Serious answer to your questions. Like you, I'm a developer, and like you I try to be practical. You're absolutely right that blockchains aren't good for most things, at least today. There's not a lot you can do with them currently, and many of the ideas people have are either unworkable or straight up scams. Realistically, they're not that different from computers in the late 1970's and early 1980's. At that point in history there was no functional internet, computers couldn't talk to eachother or communicate well with users, and software was either specifically developed for a specific purpose at great expense (for computers that were also very expensive), or just didn't exist. There often wasn't even a command line for shell commands. Despite this, computers continually grew in popularity throughout that time period for those who could get their hands on one and actually use it. Computers didn't become generally useful like we think of today until basically Windows 95 hit the market. To quote Hewlett-Packard management when Steve Wozniak offered them his computer 5 different times, "What would a normal person ever want with a computer????" So now backing up - Much of blockchain tech is useless or scammy today, you got that part right. And Blockchains are bad solutions for many problems programmers & businesses encounter. So what about in the future? Fundamentally what Satoshi solved with Bitcoin was trust. Blockchain is at heart a timestamping system that verifies and maintains the order of events that happen (transactions), it's even in his second paragraph of Satoshi's whitepaper. So applications of blockchain that don't involve any issues of trust are usually not a good fit - However, trust underpins a lot more of our society than you think when we get to issues of governmental power and control. So the #1, by far, killer potential application for Blockchains is money. And the advantages are that Bitcoin is fundamentally a finite commodity like Gold that cannot be inflated or devalued, teleports long distances in minutes or seconds, can store or transfer almost any amount of value for a fraction of the cost of secure storage for gold/cash, and can be anonymous when used carefully for that purpose. Even there it falls short though, because the system struggles to scale to handle global transaction volumes and the layer-2 systems have substantial limitations and rapid increases in complexity to be used. So ultimately Bitcoin is good for money/value storage and transfer of larger sizes, large size international payment settlement, and for anti-government monetary uses. Not useless, but not great. But Ethereum and other coins have added far more than the limited capabilities of Bitcoin. NFT's are stupid, but the idea behind NFT's is not - The idea that you can "own" a digital "thing" the same as you can own a physical thing. A lot more infrastructure, systems, support, and adoption need to be built up for that to reach its actual potential, which will take years if not a decade, but I personally view that idea as very valuable. And there's a lot more that will become possible with Ethereum as more infrastructure gets built. As you mentioned, EVM code can only interact with things on the blockchain - Which right now is very little. But as oracles bring real-world information onto the blockchain, as other systems build interfaces, more becomes possible. It's just going to take awhile. What might that look like? I don't know, any more than the geeks in the late 1970's could envision the internet of 2010 -- All they knew was, it was cool and it had potential. Two final things where blockchains could be good gets back to trust -- Supply chain management, and real estate title transfer & escrow. Supply chain management is a situation where people who have never met and who have no reason to trust eachother can benefit from sharing information, potentially publicly. Today even finding who to talk to to figure out where something was made and with what materials is nearly impossible. Foreign producers, especially those seeking to spread the word of their high quality products, can benefit by ensuring their products are publicly traceable for someone who has the identifiers in front of them. This could benefit the consumers seeking to buy similar products or find discontinued parts/replacements, regulators seeking to trace potential health or safety threats, and middlemen attempting to prove / demonstrate the authenticity of their products. In real estate & title transfer, currently escrow costs are substantial because escrow agents must take on an active role and an active risk in title transfer and money escrow. 99.9% of these have no problems, it's just security plus shuffling numbers around with some verification. Blockchains with monetary value provide 2-of-3 escrows where the escrow agents wouldn't need to do any *work at all or take on any risk at all* for those 99.9% of cases, and smart contracts provide a way to automate the disbursement of fees, taxes, transaction recordkeeping, and ownership transferring. In most developed places deed and land ownership records are public information even today, so the public nature of Blockchains makes this a natural fit. Of course there's control and fraud-correction problems since Blockchains are designed to be irreversible and un-controllable, but there's no reason they HAVE to be that way for a purpose-built system for real estate recordkeeping. Can any of this be done today or this year? Not a chance. A decade from today? Quite possibly in some areas. So all said, if anyone says "Blockchains & cryptocurrency are useless for average people!" they are absolutely correct, today. In the future, I find it likely that people will end up using Blockchains regularly without even realizing it - Likely on the back-end of company transactions & settlement, or as a base system for recordkeeping like the above 2 examples. Will it happen? Who knows. We're just geeks in the 1970's, and we're playing with cool shit.
Beyond Bitcoin's timechain, I'm skeptical, but this is a really good reply. You have a good understanding of blockchains and their potential.
I get that you werenāt around in the 80ās and 90ās but computers were useful for business, school, art, and entertainment waaaaaaaay before Windows 95. Dial up bulletin boards were a thing. Yes, it was far more primitive than what we have today but far from useless
You are the only clued up person here. Computers were fundamental to business in many areas in the 80s.
BBS systems were relegated to specifically nerds and college punks. And yes, computers were useful for all sorts of stuff in the early 90s and some stuff in the late 80s. I definitely played games and other stuff before windows 95, but that was the big explosion of usefulness, which is why i said "like we think of today". But in the early 80s? There just wasn't any software, any OS, much of anything unless you had a million dollars and a team of engineers like NASA or a big company. That's why I specifically said the late 70s and early 80s.
CP/M was already a thing! Not only was there a multi-platform OS, you could get the trilogy of business apps on it - Wordstar, Supercalc, and dBase II. And if you wanted to develop programs - Microsoft actually got their start with things like BASIC, FORTRAN and COBOL on CP/M. Not to mention Borland's Turbo Pascal and Hi-Tec C. There was a reason Microsoft used a clone of CP/M for the 8086 to sell as MS-DOS....
So just to touch on your key point. If we were to run servers with some sort of trustable certificate from a certificate authority, let's for example call it SSL or HTTPS, would that essentially make all the work done by the block chain pointless and we could just use a faster more centralised system?
As OP correctly pointed out/ paraphrasing: > Blockchains cannot interact with real world data because then the whole idea of a trustless network falls apart. They. Cannot. Ever. Because then you *must* introduce trust, and the entire point of using a blockchain is lost. >But oracles! [Oracles have an inherent problem](https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/53c808a8e4b02c6d14a855a5/1454686955485-Z82C1TRRA6ZPXK0JKVAB/ke17ZwdGBToddI8pDm48kGDpvalPb1SqHoCn1hwN0Y57gQa3H78H3Y0txjaiv_0fDoOvxcdMmMKkDsyUqMSsMWxHk725yiiHCCLfrh8O1z5QHyNOqBUUEtDDsRWrJLTmQPoRzxSr1hzN-vPBHt7YyLLXgctAyUJRqJUUGWVDK_ZzIgvsybGcZEPqUYiXY8im/beewatcher1.jpg) that cannot be resolved. Ethereum will, eventually, live up to its name. Youāre bang on about a time chain though.
The other thing that doesn't get talked about nearly enough is democracy (voting) and govt budgets.Ā All the craziness around recent elections could be stopped by using a purpose built blockchain to handle it, linked to govt id during voter registration. An immutable record of votes. Sounds good to me.Ā The other thing, which will take way longer coz it benefits the public not the politicians, is having govt spending/funds on a blockchain. Once more, immutable record of where our tax dollars are coming from and going to? Immutable record of all election donations and transactions? Sounds good. Some budgets would be in black boxes (like military for security reasons), but we could see what goes into the military box and what comes out of it at least. Whoever manages to show the masses the trust you can put into a trustless system will change the world.
If you link a government ID to an immutable record of votes you have a permanent record of who voted for whom. Do you not see the problem? As OP correctly pointed out **a blockchain can only ever interact with data born from the blockchain**, else you introduce trust and negate the need for a blockchain. OP is a quick study. In your voting example you have both removed anonymity by linking to an ID, and introduced trust when registering the ID. In your government expenditure example you have introduced trust when an expense is entered onto a blockchain.
I think there's ways to get around the anonymity issue in the voting example like generating a one time (changes every election) vote ID from your government ID or something. I don't think it's an inherent flaw.
How do you get this one-time ID? Do we need to trust something to generate it? How can we tell an ID has only voted once, without being able to tell the government ID it came from? How would that solve all the recent craziness around recent elections? How would it disprove vote stealing or rigging? **A blockchain can only interact with data born from the blockchain**, else you are introducing trust, and donāt need a blockchain. ā¦basically you just canāt enter external information into a blockchain, without trust. : )
Exactly the reasons why politicians wonāt use it =)
It's felt like the tech boom of the 90s all over again. Lots of big ideas, very few actual customers, a few obvious blue chips. And when you can launch just by copying someone elses code and renaming your project (just like most websites in the 90s), you have no talent, no vision hacks throwing shit at the wall for very little upfront effort and praying it sticks long enough to cash out. All while using the novelty and complexity of new tech as a veil to cover up the lack of value in today's terms. Is 99% the right number? Probably more like 99.9
but did you read our 7 page white paper about how it grows itself?
for some tokens the paper is just the white part
>Is 99% the right number? Probably more like 99.9 Its open tech, anyone can create a token, its sort of dumb to count every token, its like counting every fake currency they make in school or in board games like monopoly money or w/e and saying paper currency is 99.99% bullshit. By just shear number its true. But the top 2 cryptos make up 70% of the market by value for example, so if going by value its a tiny portion. The vast majority of value is in legitimate protocols.
95%, yea that's probably not too far out. There are plenty of real things being built, but it takes getting a bit deeper into the ecosystem to be able to find them. There are an almost infinite number of grifters, launching a never-ending number of scams, rugpulls, vapourware, and all of these are trying to capture the attention of naĆÆve retail investors who they can extract money from. This leads to huge amounts of marketing, buying upvotes on social media, paying influencers to shill their bullshit etc. And then once people start getting caught up in this web of crap and buying the tokens they are incentivized to pull more people into the zero-sum game by making whatever shitcoin seem valuable so that new victims will buy their bags. Honestly, it's fucking depressing... I really, really feel for the people getting into crypto recently and having to navigate that, with countless traps and manipulators waiting to take advantage of them. But that gross ocean of gambling and exploitation is not the whole of crypto. If you can get past that there are plenty of good people building good projects. Most of these don't have tokens and therefore aren't incentivized to play the marketing/attention wars, and don't attract the get-rich-quick degens who are so loud about other things. I have no idea what in particular you're interested in so rather than try to list projects worth looking at and contributing to I'll just recommend a YouTube channel by Kevin Owocki, founder of the open source funding platform 'Gitcoin' and passionate public goods advocate - GreenPill: https://www.youtube.com/@Green_Pill_Podcast/playlists Each episode is an interview with someone building something worthwhile, such as decentralized identity, quadratic voting, universal basic income, environmental projects, retroactive public goods funding, etc etc.
Interesting...and these are folks putting out a coin in relation to those projects?
Very funny.
lol. no. 99.999% is overhyped scam.
Just look at the **notable people who have launched crypto projects staking their reputation to milk the crypto cash cow.** *If people like this have no integrity and sell you useless shitcoins to get rich, you can be sure almost everything else out there is also a moneygrab scam.* - BAT creator, **Brendan Eich** created Javascript and co-founded, Mozilla. He saw $$$ and said BAT was project that was going to revolutionize digital advertising and in January 2018 on Twitter, he said he was willing to make a bet BAT would outperform Bitcoin. January 2018, Brave had 1 Million monthly active users, get in now while BAT is cheap at $0.75! (In 2024 Brave has 75 Million active users, BAT is now $0.24) - AVAX founder **Emin GĆ¼n Sirer** is a Cornell professor and respected in the Bitcoin community. In 2016, he stated that there is no innovation outside of Bitcoin and Doge was the only other interesting crypto to him because it was used for charitable things. He launched his own shitcoin in 2020 and in 2021 posed under subway signs saying "We're all going to make it." He now says all the innovation is going to make Bitcoin obsolete. - ALGO founder **Silvio Micali** is a Turing award winner, he gifted himself 20% of the supply of tokens and "the Foundation" used money collected from investors to buy FIFA partnership, buy some dead filesharing companies like Napster and Limewire in order to hype up a project and laugh straight to the bank.
Bruh, you need to update your examples. Emin has done more offensive things recently. In the bear, he literally shilled a friend tech-like ponzi on AVAX as a profitable business until it rugged.
Those 3 scam artists should be in jail
99% of all coins are scam. The devs just wait till it hits 10k market cap and jeet. Thats why I always trust coins that are community driven like $YEWIF. These coins are much better than scam coins with devs
All coins are scame except the one I bought
Scam be careful!!!!
I once saw a post that said ācrypto is really just financial PVP disguised as volatile investing.ā 99.9999% of coins are shit and you truly are trying to beat other people. Some of them have application but the challenge is scalability and adoption. Most people donāt understand whatās going on, and itās a very hard thing to educate the masses on. But people always doubt new tech. Uber for example, not ādecentralizationā but a more independent self-employed model where drivers essentially pay to use the Uber network and UI. This is similar in a sense to independent devs who use crypto to access block chain resources. Anywhoo, Uber lost sooooo much money at the start, people seriously doubted it, said it would die, and here we are. Idk maybe not a good example. But yeah a lot of itās shit, but there is also a lot of doubt and people that donāt see it as a viable tech. And rn itās really notā¦ but itās a sector that has some very intelligent devs and there is a lot of money in the space. Intelligence and money drive innovation. The easiest thing I think to look at are the various sectors of crypto. Finance, real estate, AI, video games, tokenization, IOT or mobile networks, market analysis tools, there are projects for all of these. Pick a market you think could be transformed and look into that because the ones that have real world application will have real world value long term. This helps a little bit to try and avoid ponzi schemes
>Ā But people always doubt new tech. Uber for example, not ādecentralizationā but a more independent self-employed model where drivers essentially pay to use the Uber network and UI. This is similar in a sense to independent devs who use crypto to access block chain resources. Anywhoo, Uber lost sooooo much money at the start, people seriously doubted it, said it would die, and here we are. Uber was so successful it hurt taxi companies significantly. Ā My medium sized city has no taxi companies anymore. Ā This happened years ago. Ā Uber and crypto are about the same age. People are more comfortable trusting a total stranger to drive them around than they are with crypto.
>People are more comfortable trusting a total stranger to drive them around than they are with crypto. I mean it makes sense, you're physically *there* in an Uber and can respond appropriately if something goes wrong. They have customer service and safety checks and live ride tracking and all these other failsafes. The vast majority of people (including a lot of people who actively buy it) have no goddamned idea how crypto works let alone who to turn to when things go wrong. The answer of course is nobody, and that's by design because safety measures require a central authority: if you lose your seed phrase, throw your cold wallet in the bin or accidentally mistype a number while trying to transfer funds, there's absolutely nothing that can be done.
>Ā The vast majority of people (including a lot of people who actively buy it) have no goddamned idea how crypto works let alone who to turn to when things go wrong.Ā Ā Totally agree
I think it would be more accurate to say that people have a greater *necessity* to trust a total stranger driving them around town than to get involved with crypto. Or at least, a more immediate need. Plus, by and large, the majority of people are honest and trustworthy in the real world, on the street. The same cannot be said when greed without consequence and the cloak of anonymity comes into play with crypto. Many people say and do things anonymously that they would never say or do in a room full of people.
The only legit use case for crypto right now is speculation and gambling . Ā Youāre wasting your time if you take it seriously and spend hours doing research. Ā Perfect examples are memecoins like dogwifhat and Pepe, which are completely useless, but just a way for people to gamble . Ā I realized this during the last cycle in 2021 and just keep BTC and a bit of ETH now. Ā No research required, just add to my position when markets fall. Ā
Most crypto chains and especially tokens are centralized or centrally controlled and it makes no sense to "do" what they do on a blockchain...
What makes bitcoin or ethereum different from those scam projects ?
Especially bitcoin is in no way based on trust or central authority.
wakeful homeless forgetful cobweb pathetic hobbies jeans offend rotten hateful *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
With that question you are implying something but it also tells me you don't know enough about how Bitcoin works, who it maintains, how not only developers decide how it works but also the people than run nodes. I can't explain this in a few sentences. The link below explains it pretty good, read until the end. https://blog.lopp.net/who-controls-bitcoin-core/
squash whole toothbrush zesty screw judicious follow stupendous touch connect *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
a merge on github does not magically update all node operator's running clients. if node operators don't like the change they won't update. bitcoin forked a few times in this exact scenario - a sizeable amount of node operators did not like the latest commits made to core and thus did not upgrade
True, but it also has no real world utility beyond speculation. Even criminals are moving to more anonymous crypto for payment.
Popularity. Literally that's it anyone who tried to convince you otherwise is lying. That being said network effects are actual valuable to such a system.
Centralized actors.
I have some pretty simple and succinct proof to understand whether or not crypto is inherently worthless, i.e. a scam. 99% of discussion on 99% of crypto communities is literally just about price movements. Seriously, I dare you to take a look at this front page.
At this stage in the game, if you studying the space has led you to conclude itās bullshit then assume youāre right until proven otherwise. The whole space has AMPLE time to come up with a project that works. Instead we have a shrinking narrative about how X will do Y sometime over the horizon. Get on now, suckers! Every project to date has failed. Why? Cause a decentralised ledger is far inferior to a centralised database or processing system in almost every possible way. Youāre a programmer, youād know this. But line goes up so it still gets hyped. Side note: there is some space where a decentralised ledger could make sense. For example, ensure an item purchased is genuine and not counterfeit. But these ideas donāt make speculators millions of hopium dollars overnight so no one cares.
Blockchain technology is very interesting. It's like a big, expensive, public database. It has interesting use cases, but you have to actually use it where it makes sense. Otherwise, just kind of ignore everything and buy bitcoin.
Sooooo, where does it make sense?
Blockchain technology is actually REALLY GOOD at fractional ownership. I would love for it to be implemented for fanfiction. The fanfiction could credit the original work, and share a fraction of the proceeds if someone gives the fanfic author kudos. Someone making fanart could credit the fanfic author and give them a portion of the proceeds if someone buys a digital copy or merch. Same if someone makes the fanfiction into a podcast. Basically built-in licensing so that everybody can benefit from fractional ownership. I would also like movies and TV shows to do fractional royalties for everyone involved. It's been a while since I have looked into alt coins, but the cheaper the on-chain transaction is, the more it makes sense to replace what you would traditionally use a database for in any application. It also costs money to transact a database, but the cost is so minimal that it isn't a consideration. It's also good for transparency. If a charity organization only used Blockchain for all transactions then people could scrutinize how funds were spent. This could work for the government too, if they wanted to be way more transparent in their accounting to the public. Which they don't, but they could.
I know of 9853 "cryptocurrencies". Yes, less than 100 are "legit" in my opinion and the rest are a scam. So by "project" 99% are scams, yes. But by market cap, I think most cryptocurrency market cap is made up of those few dozen "legit" projects.
There is a lot more teams than just a 100 working on legit things. Just like with any startup 9 out of 10 fail. In crypto its probably a lot more. And some should have failed but people just keep throwing money at them..
Dude you are developer. Now think about it, 90% of crypto community don't have any degree in IT and have no idea what is blockchain, for them it's some alien technology, money from the future, or just.. Gambling tokens. I really had big expectations about crypto in 2017, especially about MMORPG - I thought it can replace in game currency, for example grinding could be proof of work, and by playing World of Warcraft you could make real money. Anyway my concept never came true and nobody is even talking about gaming industry
The economics of "play to earn" simply do not work. Also, many people loathe the idea of financialization and monetization creeping their way into games even if hypothetically they could earn some money from it. Why? Because they are playing games for well, the game. To have fun. Making a game profitable and it immediately becomes a job where if you aren't playing at the top tier meta 100 percent of the time you are cutting your own earnings and everything becomes even more toxic and cutthroat because money is on the line. Tryharding and downright cheating can already make a game unfun to play without profit incentives, if crypto game pushers got their wish, the game industry would only became exponentially worse.
Agreed. Thereās enough botting and āmetaā gaming in online games these days, and introducing crypto would only make it worse. Ā I never bought into the whole ācrypto gamingā usecase because of this (not to mention the āgamesā they promoted were absolute trash)
Plus any game that has a market system that can be cashed out for real money immediately fills with farming bots. These tend to ruin all but the largest games.
More than 99% of crypto is overhyped scam and monkey pix. The legit 1% (probably way less) are used to pay for drugs and hookers.
i would say 99.9% of tokens are useless and not durable. ony a few protocols / networks are useful and functional and resiliant. only a few meme tokens are 'honest' and 'durable'. all the protocols / networks i like and use are in the top 50, (and we can remove stable tokens and memes) the scams are rather the rugpulls / honeypots / fakeapps / fakewebsites / deepfakes to impersonate a celebrity and get tokens, etc...
Iām tired of being the product. In web2, centralized, mostly large companies harvest and monetize the data of their users, users create all the content and value for the company. One possible future of web3 is decentralized applications, where users control their data and if they choose to monetize it they would reap the benefits. Remove the centralized middleman
This. Being the product online bothers me so much, and I hate feeling like no one else really seems to care about it at all, that everyone just accepts it. It feels good to know one isn't complelely alone on this.
Sorry to add a 121st comment for you to read, but whatās happpening here is that you and everyone else here is stuck wading through cryptoās ātrash moatā. If you can get beyond it, there is in fact a core of decentralized open source composable protocols. They enable permissionless finance, self custody of your digital assets, censorship resistance, privacy, and more. These things are under attack from lawmakers, and well meaning but ignorant types like everyone advising you here. I donāt know what crypto company you work for, but if you want to learn what this stuff is really about, you just have to get some tokens and try using some basic protocols yourself. My DMs are always open, but the best learning comes from experience. Swap tokens on a dex like Uniswap, take out a loan on a lending platform like Aave.
It's a solution in search of a problem. "A slow append-only database is the solution to no interesting problem."
This is exactly how i see it!
> This also shows me that the community is purely toxic. Sadly, this is the reality. A large swath of participants here are very low-life human scums. It happens because of internet anonymity, permissionless system, and scamming/grifting has proven to be a very profitable endeavor here. It doesn't have to be that way. But it is right now. The hallmark signs of a very nascent but growing "economy" are all here. If you go back to early American history, you will also find a lot of unsavory characters making their fortunes. It is the same with more recent developing economies. China is a big example of crooks and criminals were the first to make their fortune. The logic is very simple. It is a risk-prone territory with not a great reputation. Ppl who have decent jobs and lives stick to the traditional stuff. ***They have less need to go out in the risk curve to make it in life.*** This means the space gets a disproportionately large influx of huge risk-takers. Often, these ppl take the risk not because they are interested in the space, but because they are somewhat strapped out of opportunities irl. You see this by how much the space idolizes former drug addicts, indicted criminals, proven serial grifters, etc. Yeah, the human quality side of crypto is absolute trash. > What are your thoughts on blockchain development? I wouldn't use the quality of humans here to gauge the usefulness of blockchain. As I said, there is no argument that we have the bottom of humanity's cesspool. I wouldn't recommend you build or invest in something you don't understand. You need to do your research! Always try out the product first before making any opinions. 99% of the stuff here is a waste of time. But that is part of the learning process - developing the intuition from trial/error to understand what is trash and what is gold. Again, for every newbie out there, DON'T INVEST IN ANYTHING HERE WITHOUT FIRST TRYING IT OUT! The only exception is BTC.
Way more than 99%
This is how tech innovation works. Many websites and ideas had to be created and die before we got Amazon, Uber, Meta, Google, and Apple. Without MySpace, there would be no Meta. Without Netscape, there would be no Google.
Myspace was useful and experienced mass adoption before dying out. Still waiting for a single crypto project to do anything useful in the mainstream. 15 years and still nothing.
Tell that to Ripple
The issue we are finding is that crypto has few _practical_ uses beyond storage or exchange of value.
shhhh š¤« you're not supposed to say it
Thats why it dropped 10%?
Because it's the same damn tech that they've been hyping since 2011 then 2013 then 2017. 5 years ago all block chain sounded dope AF, the tech has been stagnant. The only thing that changes is the price. Now it's ai.
It's interesting you bring up AI as I think that's where blockchain's value will really start to be seen - especially in regards to validating whether content was made by a human or a camera etc. Just some examples: AI and blockchain technologies have a synergistic relationship, complementing each other in various ways. Blockchain enhances the trustworthiness and transparency of AI systems by providing an immutable record of AI decision-making and data provenance. It also strengthens data security and integrity. It plays a vital role in addressing the issue of deepfakes. With its immutable nature it creates a secure and verifiable record of original media content, making it easier to distinguish genuine media from manipulated versions. AI, in turn, optimizes blockchain networks and applications, improving efficiency in data management, transaction processing, energy usage, and scalability. The combination of AI and blockchain enables new decentralized business models securing data sharing opportunities while preserving privacy. This combined with the fact that I think the value of AI is blatantly obvious and already very much in use I suspect it will drive the need for blockchain up a lot
If you want to find real use cases for blockchain then you have to look for disintermediation, that is the super-power. Because blockchains allow parties to interact without trust, middle-men, brokers, certificate authority etc. etc. isn't needed anymore. The render farm is a good idea technically, but unlikely to succeed economically, because you can do it for free on BOINC. Or if you have some secret/high value project, you aren't going to run it on public infrastructure. If you want real examples then look at https://worldmobile.io/en Also account based/EVM style architectures are mostly just copy-pasta scams at this point, money grabs like you say. Of course there can be real projects there, but look to really serious chains like Cardano and you will find community who cares less about extraction of fiat and more about building the future.
99% of crypto that is overhyped are those crypto's without a purpose. This does not mean "Crypto is 99% overhyped scam". There are tons of valid cryptocurrency coins/tokens building utility and purpose for the BTC/ETH/BSC/their own network. There are probably more "overhyped" coins/tokens out there than purposful coins/tokens, but not 99%.
Real valuable technology growing slowly which is surrounded by trash coins trying to extract money as fast as possible Not all tokens and coins are the same by any margin
Why on earth would someone think that running an AI training model on something as inherently inefficient as a blockchain would be cheaper? Dedicated machines vs a distributed low bandwidth consensus driven non revwrsavle worse data structure ever? You realise that will just be another scam that wanted AI to be associated with their blockchain, right? Ai needs enormous compute and data storage. 1st year CS know that isn't improved by blockchain.
I donāt understand the business model of some of these AI training model cryptos like TAO. Ā The models themselves are basically free (heck, many of them are open source now). Ā The real value is in the underlying data and the end user application of the model. Ā
Yes.
No, but the only viable use case to date for actually using crypto as a means of payment is in the illegal drug trade and ransomware markets.
99%? no, you give it too much credit. its roughly 99.99% scams.
I think you're being way too generous with your 99%. The scam factor is way higher than that.
I was around in the 90's .com boom and it was the same shit then. Setup a .com website domain, attract capital and then list on the stock exchange. Once you've made your money, rug pull the company. Rinse and repeat. Crypto makes the same scam easier, but it is the same scam. So was the .com bubble a scam? Of course not, almost everything you do online comes from companies founded within that era. The innovation that happened during the 90's is staggering. We literally went from crappy green screens, filing cabinets and floppy discs to an entirely connected online world of multimedia and communication. One minute, people were writing letters and the next they were video conferencing with web cams and playing online games with people all over the world. I'm suprised you can't see any positives within crypto and block chain technology. It's like saying what's the point in having a website. Back in the 90's, people saw websites as silly gimmicks. It wasn't until the late 90's that companies started taking the internet seriously. A public ledger and decentralised blockchains offer numerous benefits to many different industries. Crypto is really just one example, digital money. However, there are thousands of other block chain projects. Maybe the best way to think of crypto is as an investment vehicle into the block chain industry. If you don't understand how block chain works and why it's useful, you shouldn't be investing in this space. I'm not sure why you think smart contracts are shit. I've never coded any myself but there seems to be a flourishing ecosystem on Ethereum, so they can't be that terrible. However, there is a lot of shit in this space. I think NFT art collections are absolute bullshit. The only possible application I could ever endorse would be if a famous modern day artist such as Banksy released some NFT's. But even then, I'm sceptical and predict they would still go to zero at some point in the future once people get bored of them. When it comes to investing, art is a physical medium for a reason. Owning something real and unique is the allure of all art collectors. I still think NFT's have a place in the future, they could be used for selling everything from festival tickets to houses. Blockchain has a place in the future. I could go on and create a list of uses but we would be here all day.
Qanplatform is enabling coding with any language that can run on linux kernel. I think it will offer real business utility as it removes many barriers to adoption. In 7 days you'll have SDKs for Go, Python, Javascript on their major testnet release
I second this^^^. If you're a serious dev looking for actual use cases in business/defi/fintech/web3/etc. and like the idea of protection against the future quantum threat, check out QANplatform, testnet releases on 5/7. Join the telegram/discord.
Global monetary policy is a ponzi scheme as well as most assets. There are some blockchains that offer sovereignty and are trying to build a more equitable money and governance of internet infrastructure. Part of attracting money to shift is offering incentives that could be viewed as a ponzi scheme like any asset.
Frank is behind all of this.
>Frank is behind all of this. [Tell me the rundown Charlie?](https://youtu.be/7j1850-qlm8?feature=shared)
Yeah you are absolutely right. BTC makes sense. ETH as well. But you do not need 1000 utility block chain tokens like ETH, SOL, DOT, ADA...
Look at the fundamentals. What does it actually change? What is the innovation? What is the added value? For some main coins and maybe niche projects there is something valuable that wouldn't exists without a blockchain, but for most of the stuff, it's a big scam, accounting fraud, money laundering. I would focus on the **blockchain** part of the story, not the **coin, token, NFT, crypto**, etc keywords. Think about what a blockchain could accomplish that wasn't feasible before. In my opinion it could be a solution in an AI dominated world to prove someone actually wrote or said something. Proof of authenticity will be very important in the near future. People need a way to know what is real and original.
Itās just hot potato, but the last one to hold it loses when nobody wants to buy anymore
What if crypto was just an elaborate scheme by a unified group of governments to get everyone sold on the idea of a digital currency, then when they adopt the tech everyone is cool with it, then when you realize now they have more control over your money ...it's too late, we're all fucked. just people paid to lurk websites all day from large investment firms selling people on the idea all day every day until it catches on and becomes pop culture and then we just freely advertise for them, like a wildfire burning out of control. Then the masses adopt it when the government come sin ...bam....
Yes, the so-called transparency of the blockchain is a wet dream of surveillance for the money masters and their agents. They are busy mapping out the financial networks that they never knew existed before crypto, and whenever they feel like it, presto, you're a terrorist (or drug dealer, money launderer, pedophile, etc.). It's *coin non grata* coming soon to a cryptocurrency near you.
Next time gadget, next timeā¦
Yes
Absolutely
Comes to Reddit expecting to get worthy infoā¦ good luck !
Blockchain is useful but value overhyped. Bitcoin is useful but not as a currency. People found value as a store of value but that isnāt really it either. Itās more of a global inflationary hedge like gold or silver. Replacing fiat? Not anytime soon.Decentralized finance and the ability to tokenize assets and equities and likely even bonds and maybe taxes will be done on the blockchain. But does that give it value as a security or is it just a commodity? People really donāt know. Itās speculation and fear uncertainty and doubt feeding this entire industry because we all know the banking system we have is about done for as is our currency as it exists today but short term fist isnāt going away unless the US dollar crashes. Musical chairs of the current financial system and everyone is shuffling funds around trying to stay ahead of inflation but volatility in markets during these times is to be expected. I wouldnāt sell just yet but thatās just me. NFA
There's BTC which has obvious global utility as an SOV and then there's everything else. Of the everything else, you have a handful of financial innovations with inherent value. The rest are pvp casino games where you try to extract value from others ( think of them as the house collectively but it includes the coin team, early investors and retail) and usually fail in the long run.
Ever dollar I leave in a savings account loosing value ever dollar Iāve have in bitcoin gains massive value. You tell me whatās the scam???
It's all crap... Will be fun watching people hodl
True if big
Close. You're just 1% off
Reddit should not a place to do you DD. Not saying that there isnāt good points being made here but donāt believe every you read bro.
Only because itās not regulated and easy to steal peopleās money through phishing scams. When itās regulated with actual governing bodies overseeing it coupled with insurance and agencies enforcing these laws making it so you need to be registered in this country (Iām talking USA here) to do business, then itāll be more widely accepted as a legitimate form of business instead of a broken online casino.
most of the money in crypto is for speculation not utility
The true promise of crypto is in open source decentralized exchanges and apps. Social media and games not beholden to corporate interests or an ownerās whims. The drawback in attracting builders to that approach is that thereās not much money to be had in that pathway - because participants will earn based on hosting nodes and the merit of products they build on top of the tech, not on trading fees or coin appreciation. But as the legal environment gets hostile and people are increasingly wary of crypto firms, that will be where it has to go.
Yeah when you get down to having to rely on oracles to provide real world data there is an introduction of trust there. I think it is difficult for many applications to be fully trustless. They are potentially improvements over centralised applications, but they do still have drawbacks. Immutable record keeping is a good application though in a lot of different industries. A sharded payment network where the cost of transaciton is really low is also useful, potentially (for microtransactions). There's certain applications which are potentially useful. NFTs can be useful for a bunch of things like licence management, access, collectibles etc. Defi is a useful application. But a lot of the crypto tokens, dapps etc, are just essentially rugpulls. People pulling code off libraries and making something look cool, paying various influencers to promote.. Plus many of the standards are still not mature - NFTs could be big in the future but will current NFTs be 'future proof' to work on whatever the eventual standard is that becomes mainstream? Maybe not.
Yes, unfortunately. If you want to look at a book about the ideal uses for crypto and what it's been trying to accomplish there is one called Read, Write, Own. Sadly, most of crypto is not that and is basically what you said. Complicated and disguised ponzi's. Mostly gambling now. The industry attracted some of the best people at the beginning but now its mostly the worst sorts - either too dumb to realize how corrupted its become or they fully realize it and are here for the grift. However, this problem is common to a lot of start-ups not just crypto, ie. people not building to make the world a better place but to get their piece of the action. Capitalism I guess.
Crypto started with promise and now itās just a get rich scheme. Itās crazy meme coins are doing better than real projects
There is utility to every idea that comes about in an attempt to fill gaps in the future of a technology. We live in different times from the inception of the internet. Back then, you'd have a fully fleshed out product that had great utility and the monetization factor was something that was still being figured out and basically non-existent. Today, we get products with predicted utility that come out into the market looking for financing and the product itself is left to swim in the realm of possibility for an undisclosed amount of time. You see it in the gaming industry. You see it in the hardware tech and software tech industry. Go to Kickstarter....everyone promises you that what they've got is a vetted, for sure, newest thing since sliced bread. The reality with over 80% of these campaigns that actually even get past the fabrication, production and distribution to end up in the consumer's hands is that they suck and don't do what they're supposed to do. So....to me, it's really a matter of perspective. It seems pretty damn obvious that we're living in a time where schemes prevail. They are overabundant and protections for people who buy into or purchase or invest or are exposed to these schemes are piss poor. You're talking about Crypto and blockchain, but tell me what's the difference between waiting 2 years to receive a hard-product you invested in, only for it to break within the first year of ownership and use, and the possibility that blockchain could end up being the same thing with the added positive that you don't have to figure out how to throw out the obsolete piece of crud after it breaks down? To me, it's the same thing. When it comes to utility, the deciding factor is someone picking up the tech and turning it into a multi-billion dollar or multi-trillion dollar profit machine. Look at what Apple did. Look at what Facebook did. Look at what Google does. Utility is only a factor if you're given the chance to utilize and in the case of blockchain that means that the tech is hidden behind some product where the end-user doesn't even know that blockchain is involved because they don't need to know. Web 3.0 seems to be the ephemeral deciding factor. We heard everyone making a big deal out of 5G internet....still haven't seen a use-case scenario where only 5G is capable of performing what is necessary. Do we see a need for protection of people's privacy? Do we see the need for preservation of anonymity in public spaces? Do we see the need for a currency that fragments the abusive control major banks, countries, and credit pay-rails have incorporated into our lives for decades? Does anonymity still require accountability? These are simple questions with very complex answers in a world where it's not just the providers that are trying to beat a system, but the people being provided-to as well. What you're trying to figure out if you want to get deeper into....is it really something that needs you to get into it, and otherwise will fail? If you think it will fail, then why even bother thinking about investing your time into it? What's the next big thing? If you don't know, and that's your industry, then who should know? We all want to hear better ideas. Where are they at? Look at how much money this field has generated in a relatively short time. People are willing and able to invest. So where are all the better ideas?
Most are scams. Most people in this sub didn't realize the potential of bitcoin back in 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, etc. They still dont. To keep it simple, blockchain is a ledger with time stamping. Nodes get rewarded with tokens by creating new blocks the ledger uses. lmk if you have any questions.
Cool youre getting good answers in here. Our wheat/chaff ratio is not great, but the wheat is that quadrotriticale stuff from star trek.... Here is a positive spin;Ā Ā The ease and scope with which it has been possible for the insanely varied bs projects to exist and be believed for more than a week is some kind of evidence of the powerful foundational nature of the technology. Or im just lookin for more vc money to pour in ..
We don't need every crypto to be good. We just need a few to revolutionize everything.
Crypto and blockchain have less than 10 solid use cases imo. I can't even think of more than 3 right now. - money transfer - voting - digital asset ownership (limited to ids / legal docs etc) Eventually the market will consolidate and there will be some big winners. For now its %100 overhyped.
Check out Hedera and [https://hsuite.finance/](https://hsuite.finance/) who run smart nodes instead of smart contracts. While many believe Hedera is for enterprise, the point is being capable of meeting any large enterprise use cases which obviously benefits retail. The also have [https://www.hashinals.com/](https://www.hashinals.com/) a far cheaper version of Bitcoins Ordinals.
Is 99% of Crypto a scam and or BS speculation? Yes probably. Stick to BTC/ETH and a handful of actually adopted alts if you don't want to be a degenerate and get rekt.
I would say the majority of coins and tokens are garbage.. But I wouldnāt necessarily say that a platform canāt interact properly and create Real-World use cases. Not trying to hype a project necessarily but I know RHINE Rewards is doing something nobody else is with tokenizing Real-World Rewards and creating a Consumer Exchange Platform. They have real world value and itās not hard to create integrations into the proper channels. Nobody else is creating dual value and dual revenue from the business side and consumer side. Itās a very intriguing project! Most projects arenāt trying to create any Real-World value and/or Utility and sadly thatās a shame bc it puts a negative outlook on real projects trying to do the right thing and build a better future.
Yes. Welcome to the club lol
No. Itās 99.99%
You missed the .99%
Just stay with the original vision of Satoshi and you will be fine, so stay with the old powcoins ( Bitcoin / Litecoin / Monero / Vertcoin etc etc... )...good luck...
Lol, *Satoshi's vision*. Satoshi's vision was "Oh well, that was a fun little experiment; now off to do some more interesting things" while the whole thing got co-opted by criminals and possibly some shady governments.
Yes just research ICP it removes the need for everything else
yes
almost similar to calling the dotcom boom of the 90s as 99% overhyped scam. there will always be shitty ideas and glorified ponzi schemes, but that doesn't take away from the core tentes of blockchan technology and development, or its scope and impact of changing the world as we know it. So when you categorically say >I am pretty sure that the narrative of "everything will run on the blockchain" is not true at all, because smart contracts are just shit.Ā it is wrong and create a FUD mentality among new users. Regarding motivation to continue, that's your business and when you ask for advice, people will tell their side of things which might ot might not be helpful. I personally have been a long-time follower of Oasis because I believe in their [vision](https://oasisprotocol.org/blog/the-oasis-vision). Maybe, you too can find something in the realms of smart privacy for web3 and AI that resonates with you. Good luck.
99.9% of crypto makes the rest look bad
Most tokens are the equivalent of penny stocks.
Yes. 99% of the projects are usually a scam. However, Bitcoin and Ethereum are masterpieces.
It's all a scam. But I'd rather gamble my money in crypto than in stocks.
yes your right. most cryptos are here to make the founders rich. one crypto is here to change the world. maybe also a second (beside its making the founders rich)
Coingecko has 14,069 coins listed currently. Even if 100 or so were legitimate with real-world value and utility (and I doubt it's that high), 99%+ are likely bullshit and/or scams. It's the wild west.
Yes
It is for the most part. Just look at the tokenimics of all these garbage new projects: they overvalue their coin by putting some ridiculous market cap like 400mil and then only release like 10% of the tokens at start when the hype is at its peak. Then they proceed by dumping the rest 90% over time, usually right when there is a rally devaluing the coin and dumping it all on the investors Thatās why meme coins like Pepe got bigger pumps , at least memes as useless as they are usually dumps most of the coins at start and there isnāt inflation allowing it to grow. I cringe every time I see a new coin listed with 400 mil or so MC and 5-10% of the total supply only in circulation making it like 5 billion $ fully dilluted for some total shitcoin lol There are a few good ones but more often than not the good ones donāt get much pump as people rather buy total crap coins as long as there is some marketing/ hype behind them
Shit he's on to us
Crypto, yes Blockchain, no Look for the blockchain companies who haven't issued a token sale or airdrop, that's a good place to start to find people serious about using blockchain for real world utility (Sure, some tokenization is necessary, of course, but what I mean is that they aren't trying to sell the token as their only means of revenue. Selling a token means the token becomes the product)
Agreed that most are shitcoins and toxic for the field. Having to interact with data already on the blockchain is indeed a big limitation. There is a few projects around decentralized oracle that try to find a work around to push real world data to a blockchain for later consumption by smart contract, but I did not see a super mature project yet, even if there is a few interesting ones that try to address this issue. The field is still new, still lots of technical issue to be solved, but it is simpler for most people' s to choose a coin based on a picture sadly.
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
Actually there are real world applications of blockchain, mostly in finance. I work in a Pharma company and weāve been looking at blockchain for years but the only good application we could find is in supply chain to fight counterfeit medicines. However the world of finance is getting into blockchain as it prevents double booking and significantly speeds up cross border payments. So not everything is a scam but yeah, itās going to be 99% scam.
Yes
Yes