When the 3ds was relatively new, I saw one being sold at a garage sale for $20 bundled with Pokemon. Clearly just some old person who didn't know its value. I wanted it so bad, but my dad said no. I didn't have a game console until the Wii, and never had a handheld. I've always been a huge gamer, but I was basically forced onto PC lol.
Periods of high transaction volume cause transaction fees to skyrocket. If there's a rush to buy something, then transaction fees will easily go 10x for an hour or so. It's like if Taylor Swift tickets went on sale, then the entire global economy stopped until they were sold out.
It has its fans and niche uses, but I think it has too many problems to be viable as a real currently. It's volatile, is prone to hacks, lacks consumer protection, doesn't scale well, and has a huge carbon footprint. If the global banking system had things like gas wars and a "possession is ownership" philosophy then society would collapse.
I just use a kb/mouse combo device and treat it like a PC and use VLC/online services/DVD drive to play media. It's not super traditional but it feels pretty easy since most of it is in a web browser!
My point is that in a mass-adoption scenario where blockchains are controlled by large entities, they will absolutely use these characteristics to their advantage, and because of how crypto is structured it will be much more oppressive and favored towards existing powers than more traditional methods that allow for greater flexibility and a more diverse set of use cases. That's why some of the biggest holders of crypto are the same corporations that caused the '08 subprime loan crash.
My point wasn't for or against any particular chain. It was just pointing out that crypto isn't really immutable when applied to real use cases, and is only as decentralized and democratic as power brokers in the space want it to be.
No, I'm referring to how ETC came about as the result of a huge scam that caused the whole Ethereum project to be forked. The original Ethereum was supposed to be immutable, but this conflict clearly showed that wasn't true, and there were still people pulling the strings who were too big to fail.
Not anything new to someone who's very familiar with the project, but emblematic of the promise of crypto vs the actual product.
Digital ownership on one (1) blockchain. Not really that great when you put it like that. What makes one Blockchain more authoritative than another?
Even in a closed system, if you think the admins of these chains don't keep a kill switch in their back pocket specifically for their advantage in ownership conflicts then you should probably read about Ethereum Classic. Even if they don't want to hard fork, if a chain is controlled entirely by a company, then they can edit it however they want regardless since it's not really decentralized.
The idea that Blockchains will empower the customer with digital ownership is silly to me.
Ibaudia @ Ibaudia @lemmy.world Posts 7Comments 550Joined 2 yr. ago
Is there a page for modded vehicles that look like cats being chased by cops to breakcore? This is a perfect aesthetic.