Think more broadly about what an "exchange" could be. You're thinking crypto forex, but consider a crypto-kitty bidding platform or a virtual game item marketplace.
Or market for insurance policies. Or bonds. Or stocks. Regulation is clearing up and there are many biting at the bit for this. The disruption of financial markets may not happen tomorrow, but once it does it will go fast in each market. If there are more efficient venues, competitive market participants will start moving once they realize that they will be at a competitive disadvantage if they don't. When I say efficiency, I am not talking in technical terms and not necessarily on the kind of environments we see on public permissionless chains. So let's keep transaction finality and computational efficiency out of scope for a moment.
Think of chains as subnets on the internet. The gaps will be bridged to allow seamless transfers between them.
I've been wrong before but to me this is bound to happen. How many businesses in competitive areas have fax as a preferred method of communication today?
Don't take what I'm saying as an argument in favor of buying ZRX tokens. I do think it's a cool project, albeit IMO could have done better without the utility token as an inherent component. But that's more about the business model than the tech. It will probably be another boom and bust before we see the leading protocols emerging.
> Regulation is clearing up and there are many biting at the bit for this.
In what way is regulation actively harming your ability to purchase shares of a legitimate operating business without overextending yourself financially? Please be specific.
The ability to compensate someone who is creating value in a network with ownership of said network (eg giving an early uber driver, or Airbnb host, options or equity.) this is currently not possible to do in the US, but is possible with crypto networks.
If you're willing to trust the entity holding your assets, then a database will suffice. The non-custodial features of 0x enable exchange without reliance on third parties.
Yea I mean, if we're going to go down the hole of "cryptokitties" and other asset exchange, let's be honest, we're reliant on a third party to create the value in the first place already.
judging a cryptocurrency projects usefulness on cryptokitties is like judging a front end frameworks usefulness on “TODO MVP”: it’s just the example of a tradable asset that everyone uses BECAUSE it has no value and anyone can just set it up to test.
substitute crypto kitties with something more real, like say a government starts to issue ownership information for cars (pink slips in the US i think? idk exactly) on the blockchain... there’s live, traceable ownership information, duties can be calculated and applied automatically, and traded on a platform like this. this is an asset that has real value because it exists in the real world; it’s not the bit of paper that has value, it’s the significance that it constitutes ownership of an asset
*EDIT: and i’m not saying that this idea has value either; it was just an example of something with intrinsic value rather than “third party created value”
> judging a cryptocurrency projects usefulness on cryptokitties is like judging a front end frameworks usefulness on “TODO MVP”
If you sold one of your TODO notes for $170,000 [1] frankly I think that'd be a fair judgement to make.
> substitute crypto kitties with something more real, like say a government starts to issue ownership information for cars (pink slips in the US i think? idk exactly) on the blockchain... there’s live, traceable ownership information, duties can be calculated and applied automatically, and traded on a platform like this. this is an asset that has real value because it exists in the real world; it’s not the bit of paper that has value, it’s the significance that it constitutes ownership of an asset
You know you can do that with a database right? Literally, a database. Like we have today. That's how it works today. You're trying to introduce complexity and inefficiency into the US government. It's like trying to sell ice blocks in the arctic, but somehow dramatically less efficient.
I already trust the government to allow me to drive my car. Why on earth does this need to be decentralized? It's the definition of centralized. A vehicle registration reflects the governments acknowledgement that you own that vehicle and are allowed to drive it at the governments discretion. If they revoke it your blockchain entry will be totally worthless and just out of sync with reality. The value is created by the government.
> If you sold one of your TODO notes for $170,000 frankly I think that'd be a fair judgement to make.
Other than the fact that people spend stupid money on stupid things [1], I'm not sure what your point is
> You know you can do that with a database right? Literally, a database
Yes, and this is a generic solution that applies to any kind of asset, and then software like 0x can plug in to trade said assets. Generic cases are always more complex than specific cases
> trying to introduce complexity and inefficiency into the US government
Well actually I'm trying to do nothing of the sort: As I said, it was an example of asset trading of something with intrinsic value, and not a valid use-case
> I already trust the government to allow me to drive my car. Why on earth does this need to be decentralized?
It has nothing to do with trusting the government, or driving a car. It has to do with transferring ownership information of an asset with intrinsic value between 2 parties, ensuring payment without relying on (possibly expensive) escrow
You seem to be conflating a number of examples that I made to explain specific points to be a proposition of things that should actually be done
The reliance on the severely distorted plutocratic ownership of 0x, Ethereum, and most of the cryptocoin supplies is a huge risk factor that is often conveniently swept under the rug.
By building on 0x, or other cryptocoin software it's essential to be aware of the elephants/whales in the "economy" of cryptocoins and tokens.
Yeah that was brutal; the definition of oh, you lost a few thousand dollars? That sucks ETH transactions are irreversible. Now I lost a few hundred million so all of a sudden it’s reversible, no harm no foul -- and most importantly, no lessons were learned that day.
Think of chains as subnets on the internet. The gaps will be bridged to allow seamless transfers between them.
I've been wrong before but to me this is bound to happen. How many businesses in competitive areas have fax as a preferred method of communication today?
Don't take what I'm saying as an argument in favor of buying ZRX tokens. I do think it's a cool project, albeit IMO could have done better without the utility token as an inherent component. But that's more about the business model than the tech. It will probably be another boom and bust before we see the leading protocols emerging.