The downside of web3 has been marked this year by ‘Money Crypto’ creating catastrophic events in the space with algorithmic stablecoins (Terra/LUNA collapse), over-leveraged arrogant traders (3AC), and a fraudulent exchange run by a sociopath (FTX). Unfortunately, this has played out on the world stage. Thus this is the common association with the term ‘crypto’ that largely elicits a response of understandable skepticism of the space. How could it not? I am optimistic that the future will largely be focused on ‘Tech Crypto’ over the next decade, which is why I joined the space – I have little interest in ‘Money Crypto’ and the thesis around sound money. I believe in the ‘Tech Crypto’ sector, which is the fundamental belief that building applications on a blockchain, rather than centralized services, allows you to redistribute power to users equitably, whereas web2, all of the power sits inside of significant wall-garden of centralized experiences putting users at a severe disadvantage in a lot of circumstances -- not all of them. I take a measured approach that part of the tech future will be web3, not all of it. Why was Polygon not impacted by any of these three major events? Because we are entirely built and bought in on decentralization, we had no direct exposure to these events other than absorbing the broader market impacts they brought. I welcome and look forward to the increased regulation of centralized finance (Coinbase, Binance, formerly FTX, etc.), as we need to protect people. When it’s decentralized, there’s no middleman you need to be protected from. These exchanges serve as intermediaries for users; hence, they need to be regulated to protect them. These predatory behaviors are similar to what we’ve seen banks repeatedly do, so it won’t solve it entirely, but it will be a positive step in the right direction. A good read on this for those interested in 'Tech Crypto' vs. 'Money Crypto' so that you can have a more nuanced understanding. https://lnkd.in/gH5X_mMJ.
Lukas Šmičys
2y
BTC is robust tech, it applies physical cybersecurity constrains for web 3 as a foundation. People who have background in tech, energy, security are much better ones to listen about BTC rather those who have economy background. It is multidisciplinary thing and I’m glad article mentioned first principles, because it does require immense persistence to look through that glass to all disciplines and zoom out again to see how disciplines interconnect. You can build dapps on top of BTC. It doesn’t have sociopath CEO titled person. It just happens to be great for money too. Drop an eye from tech, energy, security perspective on Jason Lowery posts.
I totally agree, Ryan Wyatt, it's a CeFi problem, not a DeFi problem: https://www.linkedin.com/posts/patrick-schueffel_defi-decentralized-finance-an-introduction-activity-6997473513225756672-0caJ?utm_source=share&utm_medium=member_android
Technology has not failed. Humans did. FTX was a regulated exchange in the US, Australia, the EU and some Asian markets. And still collapsed. The close and allegedly problematic relationship between SEC Chairman Gary Gentler and FTX is just one example of how political regulation is not enough. FTX has taught us that a decentralized future must be the vision for generations to come. I believe that we can't just rely on more political regulation to get there, but that we need better tools for more transparency, such as Merkle proofs for an uncorruptible proof of funds, for example. In the decentralized future we are working toward, transparency is better than regulation.
Ryan Wyatt 👏👏🎯
Elliott A.
2y
I hope term 'Tech crypto' catches on.
Seth P.
2y
Well Said!
Aman Istwal
2y
that's a good read, thanks for sharing the article!
DeFi and Tokenomics Specialist. Blockchain and Business Development Consultant. Web3 Advocate and Crypto-Economics Analyst. Outlier Ventures Alumni. Expert in token financial modeling and decentralized economies.
2yCrypto is technology and also money, in order to access or support any project you need to pay. The problem is TRUST, and by using centralized companies we are exposed to closures and bankruptcies. But why is there no DEX proposal, which allows us to break the initial access barrier? That's where projects like polygon are partly to blame. Having all the resources at their disposal, knowledge and experience in decentralization. So why don't they propose a real and valid solution? A FUNCTIONAL DEX - A DEX supported by Polygon, ( with the amount of open source solutions in less than two quarters could have it active ) - Bridge functions to give cavity to the main networks. - Atomicswaps to be able to exchange multiple currencies in a single transaction. A REAL STABLE COIN - Within the dex itself, a direct stable coin redeem section. - You pay 1 you get 1, easy ( NFT redeem concept, Burn Concept) - Single account instantly audited by the blockchain and anyone can see amount available, and amount in the market, infinite supply. ( if you want extra audit, pay an certik audit monthly) - That fees go up, transaction times per use go up, use zkrollups and ligtingn network.