| You raise some extremely good points here, and you're right, the trade offs are massive, partially due to how early the project is. My view is that maturity of the project will bring some of the answers everyone is looking for. As an anecdote, the first name auctions are actually ending in the next 48h. Mean bids for early names (a few hundred) from the last time I looked in a cli were under 10 HNS, so under 5 USD at current prices.
.coin for low thousands of USD.
.11 for low hundreds of USD. So that may give you a bit of an early view of what the prices are looking like. All subject to change of course because the auctions are not done yet. For what it's worth, as someone enthusiastic about Handshake, crypto, and decentralized systems in general...I can totally empathize with the irritation you've expressed here. There's so much noise out there and 2017-2018 blockchain projects are notorious for over-promising on vague and impossible things, and then fading to nothing when the impossible things turn out to actually be impossible. One thing I'd like to emphasize: Handshake's community may be what ends up being the differentiator against ICANN, less so anything financial or crypto related. I think that is what Rasengan is trying to accomplish here: build a true grassroots effort to work together to make Handshake a real contender. Because many of the readers here already have a piece of the network (majority of the coin supply being given not to investors, but Foss developers). The simple notion that skilled, knowledgeable, opinionated, and generative individuals can have an outsized impact when raising concerns like this can be very powerful. Because it's an open network, many, many things are malleable, even economics/pricing/miner influence. Decentralization has it's trade-offs. As Steve Waldman likes to say: "it's powerful at the edges, where Hayekian information flows can cover the blindspots of centralized efficiency". https://www.interfluidity.com/uploads/2019/02/tao-of-decentr... |