rodiger

Everything after that phrase does require the blockchain though- not individually, but as a sum it would be very difficult to bring that all together in a centralized manner.

DeFi is pretty cool. Check out some of the strategies on yearn.finance or the simpler ability to be a market maker on uniswap.org.

Does anyone know offhand when we should receive the first images?

> What the fuck is good about that?

I think it's more an economic incentive for digital creators who have historically been nickel and dimed every step of the way trying to monetize their work.

> As a consumer why do you want to pay for things that have zero marginal cost?

The value for a consumer is less about paying and more about earning (which sounds dystopic to some, but is very exciting imo). And beyond that, layered experiences mean you could get an item / art / skin / etc and carry it through disparate digital worlds. One could imagine a world where no longer are you playing one game with one set of items, but are instead able to carry your stuff into multiple experiences.

Another point here: NFTs don't have to come into existance through some payment. E.g. playing an MMO and boss drops are NFTs, or by watching some sports game you're given an NFT (or in that case more correctly referred to as a POAP (Proof of Attendance Protocol)). This likely has no monetary value, but is more a social signalling device to show you care about something / did something in the past.

> Why would anyone ever buy an "experience" NFT for something they didn't experience?

Here I'm referring to digital experiences like concerts, parties, tours, AMAs, etc. where there is some set of rules to obtain the entry pass (in NFT form).

> NFTs are just a way to enforce a class system in a virtual environment where there's no inherent system of haves and have-nots

If people could altruistically create high-quality content and earn a living that way I'd agree with you. But, as we've seen with microtransactions, the model is changing as the world spends more and more time in digital 'spaces.' There is value in paying creators, and you're welcome to not participate if this isn't your cup of tea

Overall I think we're coming into this with different images of the future- agree to disagree and I hope it's less dystopic than it could be.

Agree to disagree- I think the incentives are better aligned for creators and it will create a much more vibrant digital space.

It's more about the token than the JPEG. Gated experiences, communities, in-game items, in-game art, etc is the driving force. And for digitally-native art, there's never been a better way to sell/trade it while preserving provenance.

People are betting on the fact that we'll spend more and more of our time in digital spaces, and I don't think that's necessarily a bad bet.

Slack is working fine for me

"We aren't making as much money"

Better.com makes money by selling housing loans to investors in the secondary market. Mortgage rates are quite low in recent days, so there are fewer potential customers.[0] Interest rates are also quite low. [1] This means that, while Better used to save customers a decent amount of money, that gap has compressed which makes new customer acquisition tough.

(this is based on some quick research, so please correct me if I'm wrong about any of this)

[0] https://fred.stlouisfed.org/graph/?g=NUh

[1] https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/FEDFUNDS

Depending on the intended metaphor, trolling could work too :) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trolling_(fishing)

The rest of the population should be made aware of the risks before participating

In dollars, but purists would argue that's irrelevant when transacting in bitcoin

Who's being protected if I'm fully aware of the risks? I feel like education is much more valuable than dictating what is "too risky" for an individual investor.

But agreed, what you've described is the most-likely outcome.

It's not very, very hard currently though. It's just slightly more complex and more error prone. Most complex DeFi protocols are upgradeable by design these days.

Many people in the world don't have access to a functioning financial system- what's the benefit in building one?

I agree there are tons of low value projects/grifters out there.

Happy to have a good faith discussion with you, but doesn't seem like that's your intention given that response.

Community / social signalling / digitally-native proof of ownership (this part goes far beyond avatars)

The point isn't to not depend on anyone else for anything, instead it's to unwind some of the dependency assumptions we've built up over time.

Many in the world don't have access to a financial system. If they have internet, now they do (assuming they can find some way to onboard). Beyond that, plenty of financial tools only were accessible to the ultra-rich/institutions. Many of those are now accessible to everyone.

May be worth taking a step back to see why brilliant minds are intrigued.

That doesn't make them "less secure," and there are many ways to improve blockchain wallet security (which is independent of blockchain security) beyond a single point of failure.

Flash loans are incredibly powerful and allow those without capital to take advantage of arb opportunities. I don't believe it is a given that they do more harm than good at a philosophical level. Not to mention, this exploit still exists without flashloans (however, anyone with $500,000,000 in crypto has likely KYC'd somewhere, so the risk profile is different).

The solution is better coding practices, and plenty of platforms have protections against this.

This would have likely been caught in a standard audit. Flashloan attacks are incredibly well known and any auditor worth their salt will examine those scenarios

Maybe that means it spends less time buffering so smaller total power footprint?

Surely neuroplasticity is a factor as well.

You should take a look at the breakdown... USDC is such a large portion of Dai backing (62%) that it's deemed an existential risk. They're working on reducing the reliance though with more stablecoins and more collateral classes.

https://share.streamlit.io/tadzz/maker_dai_collateralization...

that was a typo, it's 250k.

Can someone provide some background? What started this?

afaik it is a relay system so it does have other's data possibly going through. That being said the information being passed is less comprehensive.

Hah, fair enough. I just see a lot of closed-mindedness when it comes to discussions around blockchain tech on HN specifically, and it's hard to advocate for more nuanced discussion without sounding like I have an agenda.

Yeah it's probably overpriced and not a smart idea to buy. I'm not saying it isn't.

Yup it is. I don't disagree with you- there's plenty of other projects with the same goals.

I mean everything they've launched works. Yes they don't have smart contracts live yet, but they do have sound tech[0] and some cool partnerships[1].

I'm no Cardano shill and would never buy at the current prices, but if I believed they had what it takes (which is more than just sound tech) to siphon off much of the Ethereum crowd and bring in more nation-state level projects in the coming years then the valuation isn't that crazy.

Again, I don't have such lofty assumptions and will be waiting for smart contracts before I consider investing, but to say it does nothing is patently false- and if my time horizon were in the multiples of years then I'd probably consider inclusion in the large pool I'd spread my play-money across.

Is it worth $44B right now? Obviously not, but investment is a bet on the future, not current performance- and I've been wrong a lot.

[0] https://iohk.io/en/research/library/

[1] https://www.coindesk.com/from-paper-to-cardano-blockchain-io...

Vitalik! https://vitalik.ca/ obviously eth/crypto-focused but some great dives.