With Waymo, Alphabet Inc.’s multibillion-dollar self-driving vehicle project, you’re starting at Level 4–5 and waiting to scale until it can be achieved in a secure fashion. Cryptokitties or 0x relayers have taken a Tesla style approach, with centralized websites hosting the UIs and progressively opening things. Augur, on the other hand, takes a more Waymo style approach where it started fully decentralized from day one, and is now working on improving the experience and scalability to be possible in production at scale.
Why would someone build on top of a protocol instead of a traditional centralized company (side note: dApp is the new horseless carriage, a few years from now they’ll just be called apps) as opposed to just making a centralized company? There’re two answers: lower fees, and regulatory advantages/unbundling.
… dynamic monetary policy (which is part of why gold was abandoned as a form of payment in society). I think Beam‡§ has a chance of tackling this goal: it’s the only cryptocurrency I’ve seen thus far which has a dynamic monetary policy designed to minimize volatility, without keeping a 1–1 peg to a traditional currency (which won’t hold up against attacks in my opinion, except for large collateral backed reserves like Maker). Anything that doesn’t work in the regular world currency wise, I doubt will work in crypto. Anything that does work in the ordinary world, might work in crypto — and this is what Beam is trying.
Ads are not viable anymore for most web creation. They are now becoming less delivered, less relevant, and even less profitable as well as increasingly more detrimental to the whole web ecosystem: when they were the “default” choice for any kind of online monetization, they are sometimes turning into a liability for the websites which display them.
Bootstrapping liquidity is the classic chicken and egg problem. Market makers need flow from products and users i.e. takers to pursue profitable strategies. Products and users need market makers to provide liquidity. Without churning of flow, market makers cannot constantly clip the spread which is meant to compensate them for standing by as a counterparty in times of volatility. Products, on the other hand, require minimal slippage to provide a great UX and will source liquidity via centralized exchanges unless DEXs are liquid. Thus I think when about bootstrapping liquidity I think of a synchronized effort of incentivizing/e…
Mining & staking services can be bundled with cryptogaming products to create gamified experiences to earn money within games without the need to create a new token. Consumer mining and staking-as-as-service companies have an opportunity to embrace games as a marketing medium for consumers. Future profit earnings for providing work to a network can be hidden as prizes in games for consumers, encouraging them to do more work in the network.
You can think of Lava as a game played between 2 parties: randers and preders. Randers submit “random” numbers and preders try to predict what those random numbers will be. Each party deposits wei to “stake” their own trustworthiness. The entire game is financed by customers — entities that purchase random numbers from Lava.
I’ve been thinking about new ways I can create skin-in-the-game for my newsletter so I can keep producing newsletters, without having to buy tokens. Been thinking of a system similar to Cent’s seeding system. This would benefit people like Jonathan Mann who produces a song everyday for the past 10 years.
FOAM implements a general purpose simple NFT that holds an arbitrary, non-zero amount of ERC20 tokens. That means, that upon minting, it requires that the NFT has been allowed to transfer tokens from the ERC20 contract. Symmetrically, the burn function simply transfers the FOAM token back to the owner.