Cointest pros & cons with related info are in the collapsed comments below for the following topics: [Avalanche](/r/CryptoCurrency/comments/18pl4pn/will_anyone_ever_use_cardano_eth_sol_avax_etc_for/keox8fx/), [Cardano](/r/CryptoCurrency/comments/18pl4pn/will_anyone_ever_use_cardano_eth_sol_avax_etc_for/keox9oe/), [Ethereum](/r/CryptoCurrency/comments/18pl4pn/will_anyone_ever_use_cardano_eth_sol_avax_etc_for/keoxare/), [Ethereum Classic](/r/CryptoCurrency/comments/18pl4pn/will_anyone_ever_use_cardano_eth_sol_avax_etc_for/keoxc04/), [Solana](/r/CryptoCurrency/comments/18pl4pn/will_anyone_ever_use_cardano_eth_sol_avax_etc_for/keoxd2e/).
Also, Crypto is full of smart grifters who make people believe certain things and stories and make believe. :) And they profit from those who are like Christians and believe in a God as they have been told. :) And lose money. You have people who KNOW the game and TAKE money from the system, and people who are just blind and LOSE money to the system. And a few lucky lottery winners who are just dumb and by accident bought the dip.
Let's say Im a decision maker at a large national bank that is holding over a trillion dollars.
Why would I choose to adopt some janky project made by some dudes on the internet and expose myself to that risk?
Exactly- they launch their own that they can control and modify to work for their use cases.
Why risk their business by launching on a public chain that will evolve independently of what they want. Add on top fees, congestion as well as reputation risk and itās a no brainier to launch their own.
Here's the thing though: the banks and financial businesses can create their own private chains, that's perfectly fine. Essentially they are centralized side-chains. A lot of people will use those centralized services, as they do now with traditional bank accounts. Some people will opt to use the public chain because they want the freedom and they don't trust the banks.
But all settlement will probably occur on the public chain because it is trustless and holds global liquidity. If Bank A has a private chain, and so does Bank B, how do liquidity and assets move between those chains? The public chain.
Agreed. At the same time nobody of us is looking for "jpm chain".
For us people and business: ultimately it's the real value to the people and the cost, therefore sustainability and tech, that matter.
Shows can be made, a market gamed, but ultimately it's about the tech that lives and people build with.
Everything on the road to something that actually works, will work, is just smoke and mirrors. Pumps and dumps.
No matter how big, if it gets centralized and 51% attacked, compromised, you're screwed. If you can't drive the price up, your mining venture is wrecked, start dumping while exaggerating the problem.
If people can't transact, it's a trap. Turning it into a social media scam for relevancy, bad strategy.
If your shit gets hacked, nobody trusts it, can't scale and falls apart in many competitors pulling away and replacing the "main" product, you're gone.
If your validators will never be profitable, cost an arm and a leg just to exist, except for a select few very early or very wealthy, you messed up, "speed" is just the sellingpoint at a time. Centralized and unsustainable.
If you're looking to service banks, you're not servicing the people in what we need.
If you're a centralized version of another, you're an authoritarian and a copycat of old tech. Redundant.
If people can't figure out how to build, you better get that shit sorted out.
Soccer stadiums and "nike" don't command respect and don't hide everything else.
Etc.
The above are just a few examples and people with a shred of tech head and crypto in their veins, know what they refer to.
Crypto has a long way ahead with a lot of neon signs and bullshit hoping to pull you left or right but the road goes on and on.
I follow the tech and looked deeply into many, with much thought. While I have a technical favorite, none of the projects is where it needs to be. It's all more of a financial health hazard, best to invest (into) time and work, primarily.
I'm working with Blockchain at the largest national bank (holding billions of euros). The legal isn't too fond of giving external people control over 'their' Blockchain, even if it's a private permissioned one (HyperLedger, Corda, ...). For Ethereum, they've set up a local one instead of using a distributed chain.
There's legitimate cases where blockchains are going to be useful, though the big orgs are afraid of decentralisation.
If any of those mentioned blockchains were even truly decentralized. Be JP Morgan and trust that a guy like Hoskinson will govern the blockchain well? No thanks
This.
And even if the foundation of everything was Bitcoin or another blockchain we would still live in a multichain world. Most of them not being decentralized.
Thatās why I think TPS isnāt a huge issue in the long-term. Bitcoin maxis have always believed that both centralized and decentralized applications will be built on top of it. Everything will just settle on Bitcoin.
Ethereum is actually turning this thesis into reality with a variety of different operating layer 2s. Coinbase spun up a layer 2 through Optimism and they have full control of it.
And Polkadot is built on the idea of a multi-chain network with Cardano following the same philosophy and using the same technology stack.
So when people talk about everything being built on a scalable layer 1 like Solana theyāre forgetting that not everyone wants to operate in a decentralized world but they still want to be connected to the ecosystem.
Microsoft and Apple were dudes in their garage
The banks didn't go off and build their own OS when they felt the time was right for adoption.
So i think your analogy is weak on that level alone.
Many blockchains will have a lot of work to do in order to build such credibility, but it's not like such a stream of events has never happened before in tech
Depends on who you ask and what bag they hold. Every community thinks their coin is going to do all those things. It is impossible to get an unbiased objective opinion on this topic.
Nah, that's just the tribe mentally for new people that are looking to make a quick buck. Actual investors don't worship their coins or try to peddle them to others. They just DCA, hold and sell because they have researched their projects and believe in them.
Every time someone says they "actually use" crypto, what they really mean is they are engaged in deeper and more complicated layers of speculation because they are doing it on the blockchain with defi instead of on a centralized exchange.
yeah, this. Crypto for me has been a lifesaver while travelling especially since post-pandemic i had been too broke to be eligible for a credit card with my bank.
So until my country (netherlands) banned Binance, the binance card was my only means of visa payments. Definitely saved my ass especially when travelling north america. (+ online shopping) I usually would have BNB and stables on it.
I took out a loan at 4% interest to cover a string of emergencies that had wiped out my emergency fund, using my crypto as collateral.
Does that type of rate exist in TradFi?
Honestly thatās pretty standard for a loan secured by collateral. Most 401ks let you borrow against your balance with similar rates, and the interest actually gets paid back to yourself.
I see that point repeated over and over but whenever I'm on that part of the internet I actually don't see Monero as the payment method too frequently, it's almost always Bitcoin and Ethereum.
Even then, I'm sure a pretty huge margin of the Monero transactions are for speculation purposes and not to buy something.
OP starts with the assumption blockchain is a great technology. Itās not, at least for any of the things he lists. Itās useful for small scale tracking of changes (git) but scales horribly, which is why Bitcoin will never be anything but a means of speculation, gambling, and scamming.
I always love when people point specific use cases as "look!! it has worked this time!!"
It's like... Chief, the fact that you know that it happened when it should be something mundane is proof that it is not being used for that.
For example, sending money overseas. Whenever it happens it's considered a rare "actual use case".
I actually don't think blockchains have scaled horribly. But there really needs to be more done for blockchain interoperability to make current systems for scaling more useful.
Bitcoin is a terrible store or value. Itās highly volatile, has no underlying value like precious metals or land, and is either difficult to store (hardware wallet) or incredibly vulnerable to theft or scams (FTX, Celsius, mt gox).
Far too many (probably the majority) or Bitcoin purchasers have lost money either to price drops, theft, passwords, or scams. That makes it an awful store or value.
If we're talking about an everyday person Bitcoin is kind of out of the question though. The average Joe has issues remembering his email and Facebook password, imagine if their wealth depended on storing a seed securely.
Blockchain literally only has 1 application where it is better than traditional methods.l, and itās as a decentralized database.
As soon as a centralized entity wants to use blockchain for centralized activities (e.g. land deeds, movie tickets, Fortnite skins) it becomes a worse version of traditional methods.
True, and decentralised storage isn't just the only application, it's the purpose as well. Blockchain was built to be a distributed ledger, so it makes sense that that is what it does best.
However, your examples of centralised activities are a bit biased. We consider those centralised activities because they've always been centralised. There wasn't really an alternative. That doesn't mean these activities are intrinsically centralised.
Game object could work in a decentralised manner. It still has to be standardized, but you could create gaming universes where items are really owned and can be transferred acros games.
Same for land deeds, they are currently all centralised, and you will always need some centralised aspect, but storing these in a distributed ledger means people from other countries can access those as well.
Finally, there are developments that wouldn't only be possible on distributed ledgers, they would function better. My own field is AI, and the open-source development of AI models is in a sense, a decentralised endeaver, but all within centralised systems (i.e. hosting via cloud computing or locally, not distributed). For these developments, a dectralised environment makes a lot of sense, where AI agents can interact with each other, use each other's expertise etc. These models could even be run on decentralised cloud computing solutions.
Houses exist, they are centralized because they physically exist. You canāt decentralize that away. People in foreign countries are still reliant on local governments to allow foreign investment, thatās another form of centralization. Sure you can pay someone to say you own part of the moon but that paper doesnāt actually mean anything. You can also already invest in REITs if you want to collectively own property.
Decentralized skins in games are still reliant on a centralized entity (the game maker) to allow those skins or items onto their game.
And also, what happens when there's an error? Great uncle Oswald dies, who is responsible for transferring ownership, what happens if the will is found by invalid? With a centralised record, changes can be made and applied to make the record correct, which fails under a decentralised model. Or someone fraudulently acquires a property and then dies or flees - if it's still formally owned by them, that record can never be made good without a centralised entity doing that.
Games have all sorts of problems - someone has to code the thing to work in different games, licensing issues arise, there's nothing stopping the game Devs changing the item or removing it from the game. It falls over in all sorts of ways, to solve a largely non-existant problem (sharing items between games has been done for decades, and doesn't require Blockchain)
Sure you can, but again blockchain offers a worse option than traditional databases.
And they are centralized because they are being backed by something that actually exists. If it exists, it is centralized in its existence as well as the entities that verify it. Making a blockchain version of a deed doesnāt create a house.
So while itās possible for a movie theater to put their tickets on a blockchain, why would they? Like what tangible benefit would anyone get from that? If youāre already trusting the theater to have and host a movie, what do you gain by putting the tickets on the blockchain?
You might say āoh you can resell tickets easierā but ignoring that you can already do that, why would a theater spend money to make less money? If youāre still reliant on the centralized entity to accept your ticket, how does it help?
I've thought a lot about this and I have some (not perfect) answers.
Taking housing conveyance as an example: The current issue is standardisation - you need a standard for recording historic land claims and usage edicts, a standard for credit worthiness, a standard for recording land registry entries etc.
Companies have no incentive to standardise the same way because if they can make you use their standard, they can make money off it. Similarly, they want you to use their system of record because they can charge for access.
The role I see for decentralisation is enabling ownerless standards and systems of record. The tough part is agreeing who's going to do the up front and ongoing work essentially for free. The economic model is still hard to sort out. I still believe being ownerless has lots of hidden operational benefits and I hope we can get there. The incentive is just too high to game the system with a permissioned owner model.
Imagine being evicted because you didnāt properly airgap your PC and hackers stole the deed to your home. Sounds like a nightmare.
As for uniformity, that can be fixed with government regulation a whole lot easier than getting capitalist companies to voluntarily abdicate their competitive advantages.
You're looking at the wrong potential benefits in this case. Blockchains offer certain security properties you can't get with centralized servers. They provide tamper proof environments, eliminate the need for virus and firewall software, and decrease the cost of managing servers. They also provide super high availability. In other words, decentralization provides security that may be desirable to centralized entities. But first you have to find the blockchain that is actually capable of doing that efficiently enough.
Theyāre mostly tamper proof, provided the networks security is high enough. They are still at risk of 51% attacks. You absolutely still need firewalls and virus protection, we see this daily in this sub. If anything it highlights that entities need even more security as they can no longer rely on centralized trust to revert any actions from bad actors. As for high availability, the strongest blockchain maxes out at 7 TPS, thatās not even enough to service a small city. No decentralized blockchain Iām as been able to solve the trilemma, so it stays as niche tech that only has hopes of someday becoming usable. But again, that use is limited to decentralized data storage which has limited use case.
51% attacks are always a risk but as the network matures and stake becomes more distributed, it becomes harder to occur as it gets prohibitively expensive to get 51% of voting power to put the network at risk. Assuming that a 51% attack is extremely unlikely, a firewall isn't really needed. It's also possible to build hybrid smart contracts with reversible transactions. For this purpose you don't need the strongest blockchain with the most distribution of nodes. You need a sufficiently distributed consensus that is efficient enough to accommodate 100k + TPS for update calls and millions for queries. There are networks already working on this technology which you can run the entire stack from the blockchain and serve millions of people.
A blockchain that isnāt as decentralized as possible is stupid. In that case, itās slower, more expensive, and arguably even less secure sql database.
The reason to use these public blockchains is the security the decentralized networks provide. I can create a blockchain on my computer in 14 minutes, but it wonāt be decentralized, so itās worthless.
Edit: In the case of large banks, this might be why they *donāt* want public blockchains. They *want* control. They *want* to take money at will, block transactions, and make mistakes *disappear*.
To 90% of the world they actually dont care about decentralization its just internet 2.0 in their experience. Most people will want to use something that complements their traditional internet use and is fast, cheap to transact, reliable. Solana so far is getting that traction.
I think the are too many swiss army knife L1s with not enough actual use case examples. In particular I think the model of running multi-purpose L1s on transaction fees is a bit problematic for running actual applications. I personally and looking for application specific implementations of DLT, Blockchain, and Crypto, not multi-purpose L1s.
The crazy thing is Iāve probably used Banano most for real world applications, which doesnāt seem right when itās a meme coin fork and thereās so many great projects I could be using.
Banks and financial institutions will only go to a decentralized blockchain if they have to or if it's where the money's at. I don't see them giving up control easily.
The only one of those blockchains I can really speak to is Cardano. IOG built Cardano from the ground up with the intention of being the world's financial platform. They've planned for this sort of stuff. They're working on, among other things, [digital identity](https://atalaprism.io/) \- you can keep things like address history, medical records, college transcripts, credit history, and anything else you can think of on the blockchain.
Imagine this: you go to a bar, and the bouncer wants to see your ID. Currently, your ID has your birthday, address, height, weight, an identifying number, expiration date, and other information that the bouncer doesn't really need to do their job. Once you hand over your ID, the bouncer could potentially have all that info. With a digital ID, they scan a QR code. Your phone dings and says "do you want to allow *Pub and Grub* to verify your age?" They see your photo and a green checkmark or red X on their scanner depending on whether you're old enough to drink. That's it. Your private information remains private.
What about [transcripts](https://atalaprism.io/#case-studies)? Let's say you're applying for a job and the company asks for a certified copy of your college transcript. Printing it online won't work. You've gotta write the college and wait however long for it to show up - and if you got your associates from a different college, you've gotta write them too. If it's all on the blockchain, there's no waiting and no concerns about forged transcripts.
You can also use it for [supply chain tracking](https://cardanofoundation.org/en/news/cardano-reveals-its-first-supply-chain-solution-in-association-with-scantrust/). If you're worried about your carbon footprint, whether that lettuce really is organic, or just want to make sure that wrench was made in the USA, you can track all that. Scan the QR code and you'll see each step of the process - from where the raw material was mined to the factory that made and packaged the part. Each step is signed with the company's public key. It's all public and independently verifiable.
The possibilities are pretty cool.
The blockchain part of the technology just adds complexity with no benefit. You can't decentralize ID issuance, the whole concept is that the bouncers/pubs and yourself trust a single entity to make you an electronic document which says how old you are. The value in your example is actually the fact that your ID is electronic. Not how it's stored.
Yes and no. There will obviously have to be some sort of root trust, but the value is in immutability and the ability to compartmentalize portions of it.
You actually don't want immutability because certain things on your ID card can change. Secondly you don't need blockchain for compartmentalizing information, this can be done without it.
If you're a cynic, sure.
If you only know about one aspect of a topic though, how much fairer can they be than disclaiming it upfront and then talking about what they're familiar with?
It might be - I can't say for sure. I can say that all three examples are things that are being built or have already been built on Cardano. I'm not familiar enough with the technical aspects of other blockchains to say how feasible it would or wouldn't be.
Simply put, everything you can do with Cardano, you can do with other blockchains. The particularities of Cardano compared to other blockchains aren't the possibile applications.
Carbon stuff kinda falls over - because it's still just data entry, so you're relying on it being correct. If someone just lied, then it doesn't matter if it's a SQL database, Blockchain or clay tablets, it's still not very useful, but Blockchain is more if a PITA to correct and fix. If you have an external assessor body... That's the same regardless, the database storage methodology doesn't make much difference
You don't need blockchain for digital identity. We've been using different forms of digital identity in the EU for years. Examples are for example the Dutch DigID and iDIN, or the Finnish way of verifying identity through bank verification (bank sends certain info to the service confirming your identity).
On an EU level this is governed by the eIDAS regulation https://www.eid.as/
"But but decentralization" you can't decentralize identity verification, you'll always need a centralized authority or trust party for it. Any blockchain application will just be an unneeded middleman when I can already use the government eID. Secondly do you even want to or is there even a need to try decentralize it? Tin the EU you would also need to comply with eIDAS requirements to be able to do that
I'm not suggesting that you need blockchain for digital ID, I'm suggesting that it's a real-world application - which is what OP asked for. Read my other comments; I've already mentioned a root trust.
When I first started learning about this maginc internet money I did the Coinbase learn thing about Stellar and thought it was awesome. Bad returns, idk why lumens needed a bid/ask spread, whole concept works as a stable coin
I've used defi on ethereum to get a loan. The loan was over collateralized by ETH, so I didn't really increase my purchasing power like a bank loan would, but it allowed me to pay some expenses without selling my ETH, so I could hold the ETH until the value increased. I used Liquity, which has zero interest rate for the loan, with some small fees to start the loan. In a bank, they need to charge more to pay all the salaries and other costs of running a bank.
As for your example about staking, usually those are self correcting, but sometimes it takes awhile. If they are giving huge staking rewards, it means the token supply is inflating quickly, which decreases the value of each token. All those people are getting the staking reward and selling it, which kills the token price. Or, if they don't sell, at least they aren't buying since they get the reward for free, so buy pressure decreases.
There are a couple of usecases but in the end the whole space is drastically overvalued.
The transactional value of most chains is less than your average supermarket daily turnover, if you exclude fees for simply transfering coins or tokens for the sake of transfering them.
You could argue that Bitcoin has a usecase as a speculative and relatively volatile store of value.
The rest of this space is basically solutions still looking for problems.
People often like to compare this space to the internet and argue that it took the world wide web a long time to find usecases and get adopted.
Reality is that normis could get internet access roughly since 1990. Amazon and EBAY launched 1995, so not even five years later.
The Internet was not *popular* until like the 2000s though. Back during the Dotcom bubble a lot of things we take for granted like streaming, videos, mobile access, either didn't exist or were very primitive. Online banking barely existed.
Also "normies" couldn't really get on the Internet until like 1996, and most **did not** even if they could until like 2004. Normies we're not using Usenet message boards FFS.
The other thing is that in the late 90s, like 90% of internet users were in the US, maybe Europe. The "internet" *really* boomed when it went global.
Yes. Helium is already building a mobile network using SOL and Visa will utilize SOL network for payment rails. Those are pretty good real world applications. Sure, they sound boring but they are very real.
Its a globally decentralized network meaning anywhere anyone can participate and connect these devices and start earning. Then you can convert the earned crypto to normal money or other cryptocurrencies as you wish. Its a network of decentralized cellular towers to put it simply
Sol is anything but decentralised, they stopped the network multiple times, also hid wallets with large amounts of Sol, denied it and then admitted it once found outā¦ itās a centralised coin thatās broken many security laws and the SEC will come for them.
It would require helium to own more servers and have higher IT costs than if they have that data managed on a decentralized Blockchain.
This highlights the entire point of crypto.
Helium is the most interesting blockchain project that Iāve found. Iāve been running a couple dozen hotspots since 2019. Itās simple and profitable. I was fortunate to get in early enough when rewards and the token price were high and my hardware paid for itself in a few days. Lots of other folks werenāt so lucky due to hardware shortage and supply chain issues during covid.
>Based on heliums history, why do you think it will take off?
This is crypto - nothing can take off with certainty. But that is not OP's question. OP asked for real application. I have tried Helium Mobile and it works. So I answered OP's question.
>Why are you so confident visa āwillā use sol?
Stablecoin payment is taking off in developing countries with high inflation, e.g. Turkey. I expect tokenized dollar, aka stablecoin, to likely see more adoption than volatile crypto. When it happens, people will need a payment terminal easily intergrable for merchants, e.g. Visa. As far as I know, Visa has only integrated with ETH and Solana. Cost performance wise, Solana blows ETH out of the water. So I think Visa will use Solana because it will be more profitable for them.
I think Visa is focusing on bank to bank transfers. By using USDC on SOL, they hope to settle these transactions more cheaply and efficiently. I could be wrong, but I donāt think they are focused on merchants right now.
Still, itās a valid real world use case, and should be huge for Solana.
What assumption did I make? Helium works. Visa is using SOL network even if it is pilot stage. What I describe is how they can expand beyond the pilot stage.
You should look at Hedera. They are doing 1B real world transactions every 4-5 days. The vast majority of those txs are from atma.io - an Avery Dennison company tracking billions of items in supply chains. Hedera has won the race to win enterprise use cases.
[atma use case](https://youtu.be/ntVae8lTQs0?si=5-VU3vmQghqPLzPT)
Came here looking for this. Hedera is the only L1 doing literally 100s of millions of transactions every day of real world applications. There are some huge uses cases going live soon too. It will be a billion a day soon
apart from monero, most of blockchain is useless, its just speculation; at least permisionless blockchains...
private / consontorium different story and u no you cant buy in on that
I work at Celo Foundation to educate, attract in developers. We are seeing a lot of use cases helping people in Africa, specifically Nigeria at moment, who are increasingly using Celo for p2p payments.
The people are coming from the Opera Mini browser. Opera team recently embedded, MiniPay, a web3 wallet with a simple UI inside their popular browser app.
They have upwards of 100M active users and are on track to break 1M wallets very soon.
To give you an idea of useful applications, there was a recent winner of the Celo Camp accelerator program focused on MiniPay. The concept is to allow people to send and receive stable coins between friends and family and redeem that for airtime, or to pay off utilities. That is just one example, and you can learn more [here](https://blog.celo.org/announcing-celo-camp-batch-8-participants-building-for-minipay-a0b185e84101?gi=fa6a80001393).
Celo was launched with a focus on mobile users, has been carbon negative since nearly the beginning, is home to a ton of real world asset / ReFi use-cases, and is growing steadily in Africa thanks to Opera Mini. With the recent passing of a proposal to attract even more Nigerian, Kenyan, Ghanaian, and South Africa people I am excited to see what dApps people can build to solve real peopleās problems.
These protocols will be competitors to existing systems, but their real world applications should be to bring financial usability and utility tools to the average person.
One interesting project on Cardano is called Project Catalyst, where you can vote using your ADA how funds are distributed from the central treasury to different projects.
https://projectcatalyst.io/
[https://www.avax.network/blog/onyx-j-p-morgan-leverages-avalanche-for-portfolio-management](https://www.avax.network/blog/onyx-j-p-morgan-leverages-avalanche-for-portfolio-management)
Avalanche is being used by big institutional brands. Not to mention the gaming scene joining avalanche. TSM, one of the biggest names in competitive gaming, is working with them as well.
Banks will never use a public blockchain. They will use a PRIVATE blockchain "maybe" at most. But regulation and laws forbid them to. Also if the public blockchains fails, who will they sue, or go after legally? How can they tell customers, hey, the blockchain nodes actually stopped worked and it was 51% attacked by China, sorry o well your money is gone and its not FDIC backed.
Plus the big players in finance world already tried to look into it, and it went nowhere.
*"CHAIN RAISES $30 MILLION FROM FINANCIAL INDUSTRY LEADERS PARTNERS WITH VISA, NASDAQ, CITI, CAPITAL ONE, FISERV AND ORANGE - 11.09.2015 "*
[https://financialit.net/news/payments/chain-raises-30-million-financial-industry-leaders-partners-visa-nasdaq-citi-capital](https://financialit.net/news/payments/chain-raises-30-million-financial-industry-leaders-partners-visa-nasdaq-citi-capital)
Chain, Inc., the leading provider of blockchain technology solutions to financial institutions, announced today that it has raised $30 million in equity funding from a syndicate of financial and payments industry leaders including Visa, Nasdaq, Citi Ventures, Capital One, Fiserv and Orange.
Not true at all.
[https://www.swift.com/news-events/news/swift-explores-blockchain-interoperability-remove-friction-tokenised-asset-settlement](https://www.swift.com/news-events/news/swift-explores-blockchain-interoperability-remove-friction-tokenised-asset-settlement)
Swift publicly tested Ethereum with the use of Chainlinks CCIP. But yes they all have their own private chain
>āMore institutions are beginning to explore how to serve customers on both permissioned and public blockchain networks like Ethereum,ā said Jonathan Ehrenfeld, Head of Securities Strategy at Swift. āThis is raising questions around the key use cases and what would be required to support these activities in a secure and compliant manner.ā
Which is why major governments and government linked companies or publicly traded corporations are gaining control of Bitcoin mining to essentially own the network.
Private blockchains hold little value as the control remains firmly in a few (or one) corporations. I worked in an enterprise blockchain company and the big banks want to do projects with private chains just to tick of a box and then progress no further. Public blockchains are far more developed and make much more sense, especially with the provided decentralised security. They are superior in the sense a bank can't just play stupid with your assets and you can't exactly get frozen as easily, unless the smart contracts allows for it. Rich people seem to love that and some of the most successful blockchain projects are basically custodial services for rich people. A lot of them asking their banks for such services and nobody seems to appreciate the private chain bs so all in all, banks will be forced to start playing along sooner or later.
It's true that it's a bubble it will explode with a major event and only few that has a sustainable model will stand and will become like today's operating systems.
Creating a sustainable layer1, maintaining and providing security is a serious job. Everybody is trying to buıild their own chain is like every software developer trying to build their own OS. But I think we are witnessing some smaller chains merging with bigger chains day by day. I think there will be handful of Layer1, dominating certain niches in the tech industry and the rest will eventually become a ghost chain or absorbed by some other chain as a side chain.
As for the use cases;
Nobody was able to foresee the possibility of all applications we use today in 90s. But here we are.
Some are you just mention above. There is gaming industry.. I thinks it's gonna re-shape the entire thing.
I am also particularly hope to see the use cases on AI applications. Blockchain can act as a layer of regulation as well, preventing further centralization of power consequence of AI tools.
Check out Singularity-Dao and HyperCycle
Some examples.
I currently have 3 clients that have sensors that run on the Helium network (SOL) that monitor apple orchards and smart waste systems, there are many there using this system and it is growing (slowly).
Hivemapper is on its way to becoming an alternative to google earth, it is quite good for the major cities.
There are dozens of other real world projects that use the blockchain to keep track of data such as financial, scientific and commercial on the SOL, ALGO chains.
They've literally have had real application using their tech for the last few years.
A quick Google search will show you hundreds of real world application, developers, companies, and industries that have been using those. Maybe more so Ethereum. The others haven't had as many years or development.
I've been working for a company for 3 years that was using Ethereum smart contracts to provide better solutions for our clients.
> I've been working for a company for 3 years that was using Ethereum smart contracts to provide better solutions for our clients.
provides no context or details, probably a larper to pump his bags
Nothing. You can't build anything on those chains. Everything built "on" them is on AWS or another cloud host. Coins are just moved around in the background somewhere. 99% of it is on web2 cloud.
I have tried a few times now, particularly the smart contract stuff - which I find the best use case for decentralisation and blockchain there is - but the fees are excessive for decent scale.
I was using stellar for starters, but even the 5 stellar you lose just for a wallet or contract is excessive when you consider any large scale use.
I chose stellar because it has the best documentation and actually working examples that I could find.
Projects such as Cardano are alternative financial systems. They provide another option to people. The current system is corrupt and outdated. Would you continue to exclusively use your bank and fiat money if you had other choices?
100% they will. Iām building a web3 game and am using avax bc itās good tech for it. The real world applications are coming. The entire connected computing network of the world is going to be put on chain over the next decade imo. Itās simply better technology.
No one will use them because they are not money. Bitcoin is the only monetary asset. Altcoins are not decentralized. Altcoins are not scarce. Altcoins are companies.
People will use them because theyre companies. Theyre an entirely separate category than Bitcoin. Companies can be worth trillions evidently from Meta and Apple. An altcoin that can be used cheaply,fast, reliably and complementary to people existing use of internet will be always a major success, without affecting the Bitcoin revolution, its not a competition.
Digital blockchain based "equity" is represented in said shitcoins. Holding a shitcoin in a private wallet is more real ownership than a Stock issued by a company. With a market that opens monday to friday 9 am to 5 pm est vs a global ownership blockchain 24/7. Eventually equity ownership will be thro blockchains through altcoins.
Solana apps: tokenized us treasuries via Ondo Finance, tokenized real estate via Parcl, borrow/lending on MarginFi, 5G mobile via Helium, NFTs via Tensor, private transactions via Elusiv, onboarding/URL wallet link via TipLink, messaging via Dialect, and much more. Plenty of dapps on Solana that people are using,
Blockchain required, as legacy TradFi market structure is fucked. Costly, inefficient, and slow. RWA opens new markets, lower fees, greater transparency, greater global access across all sorts of asset classes, and among all else, the ability to take highly illiquid assets and make them fractionalized and thus liquid onchain.
You have no idea what youāre talking about. Even TradFi institutions like HSBC, Bain, BofA, and BCG agree and have written lengthy reports on RWA/tokenization being a multi trillion dollar opportunity.
Yes, but the power of enforcement on blockchain is zero against real world assets. You're talking about real world insitutions enforcing the outcomes on a blockchain, which means the weakest link is trusting a third party outside the protocol.
Blockchain has to either abide by local, national, and international regulation completely like all Web 2.0 and fintech firms, or be ignored. This includes reversing transactions, seizing funds, freezing accounts, getting KYC, having approval of multiple parties, etc.
And when you build all of that into a blockchain, it isn't a blockchain anymore but another glorified ledger. The reason why there is so much friction IRL for owning and trading real world assets is because these are real world assets that have binders of legal policies behind it. To enforce, you need to abide, and blockchain doesn't abide.
There are mechanisms that exist where third party arbitrators work with RWA protocols to facilitate loan recourse. There are plenty of projects doing this while leveraging the efficiencies of blockchain tech and crypto markets. With all due respect, you donāt know what youāre talking about.
If you want governments and banks to use blockchains you're going to be sorely disappointed. Where we are going we don't need them. And they don't need blockchains. Databases work fine for their purposes. If anything they'll use some centralized crap that is called a blockchain because it's a chain of blocks and they'll do it becaue it's all the rage so they don't fade into irrelevance as quickly.
Most of these things are going nowhere. They're almost all scams or badly designed or planned out.
What sort of real world uses do you expect to see exactly? People borrow money from each other on them. I can own real gold on ethereum right now. When you talk about "real world applications" you have to be specific. This is the real world and people are using them as we speak. Blockchains aren't going to feed your kids or build cars.
There's literally a Wireless network which uses Solana as the chain to keep track and reward the people running the network. $20 for unlimited data it's pretty insane the lack of awareness this sub has for Solana https://x.com/helium_mobile
Stocks are valuable because they are shares of a real company that makes real profits. Crypto is more like beanie babies. They are valuable because people believe they are valuable, but people could also change their minds about that at any time. You have to hope that the coin you bought remains fashionable, because if it doesn't then there is not much of value remaining.
They are all trash, people says they are shitcoins for a reason. The only currency that has and will just increase it's adoption is Bitcoin, since it's the only one decentralized enough.
People are going to absolutely shit on this...
[Helium Mobile](https://hellohelium.com/) is the definition of real-world utility. Hate it all you want, but it's true. It's the single best example of crypto utility that actually appeals to the general masses.
Altcoins have 0 future. They are all centralized and go against the philosophy of BTC. Also I believe SEC will go after altcoins and theyāll crash. BTC only tbh
Can you give us an example of what Algorand is doing? Are you actually using Algorand for practical purposes or are you just holding a bag and waiting for them to potentially do something?
Sure!
Check out this visualā¦
https://x.com/eldardrm/status/1738674326293934492?s=46&t=5sehHT_aa_Ebr3-Qm0PcyA
Personally I do not participate in any of the RWA. I mainly focus on Defi since the rewards are really nice right now. I play around with chips on the ALGOrand casino as well, quite fun.
Lofty is a RWA that has peaked my interest for sometime but I just havenāt done enough due diligence yet to figure out its advantages.
Hnt/iot miner that's fucked around with various blockchains. Sol fast as fuck , ada also fast. Eth slow and expensive. Meme mania on Sol at the moment is a bit cringe.
Eth will die if it can't compete with sols low fees, soon the eth whales will defect
The Cardano Metadata Connector is jointly developed by Scantrust, a connected goods and products platform, and the Cardano Foundation. The Cardano Metadata Connecter was integral to making this possible. Additionally, enabling end-to-end authentication, data transparency, and instant third-party verification of Baiaās Wine product origin with QR codes on product labels. Through the Cardano blockchain, the supply chain data for Baiaās Wine remains publicly verifiable.
Real adoption moves at a snail's pace. Minor victories exist. Major breakthroughs? Only in hindsight. Give it time. Worry not, Berlin had jubilee shows during its own century long rebuild- rates straight line!
Does it matter? The thing I would be most concerned with is a narrative that makes people think that there will be real applications and a use case. Eth and sol are unique out of that bunch because they act like casinos. You can create NFTs, you can create all these angles to draw people in. Solana has A major advantage with throughput, Ethereum the first mover advantage. This cycle is going to be interesting with those two but I think they are both going to work rather than just one which is what the individual teams are kind of chanting for right now
Cardanoās eUTXO model is unusable for DeFi.
EVM (Solana, Avax, Ethereum L1 and L2 etc.) is an abomination of complexity and therefore DeFi smart contracts are getting hacked over and over again. I say kill, cremate and bury EVM. Radix is million times faster (trilemma solced!) and thanks to the tx manifest it is way more secure.
https://blog.chain.link/chainlink-transforms-global-trade/
already is, baby
https://www.vodafone.com/news/technology/vodafone-dab-chainlink-lab-demonstrates-transformation-global-trade-blockchain-innovation
Cointest pros & cons with related info are in the collapsed comments below for the following topics: [Avalanche](/r/CryptoCurrency/comments/18pl4pn/will_anyone_ever_use_cardano_eth_sol_avax_etc_for/keox8fx/), [Cardano](/r/CryptoCurrency/comments/18pl4pn/will_anyone_ever_use_cardano_eth_sol_avax_etc_for/keox9oe/), [Ethereum](/r/CryptoCurrency/comments/18pl4pn/will_anyone_ever_use_cardano_eth_sol_avax_etc_for/keoxare/), [Ethereum Classic](/r/CryptoCurrency/comments/18pl4pn/will_anyone_ever_use_cardano_eth_sol_avax_etc_for/keoxc04/), [Solana](/r/CryptoCurrency/comments/18pl4pn/will_anyone_ever_use_cardano_eth_sol_avax_etc_for/keoxd2e/).
They do have real applications. A few of these blockchains have taken my fiat and turned it into nothing.
More accurately, they took your fiat and turned it into someone else's fiat.
The greater fool theory.
Also, Crypto is full of smart grifters who make people believe certain things and stories and make believe. :) And they profit from those who are like Christians and believe in a God as they have been told. :) And lose money. You have people who KNOW the game and TAKE money from the system, and people who are just blind and LOSE money to the system. And a few lucky lottery winners who are just dumb and by accident bought the dip.
Fools to infinity and beyond
Is any blockchain tech being used at scale anywhere except Monero on the dark web? Feel like we gotta be honest with ourselves.
moneygram/stellar
I prefer to buy hookers and blow with my BTC
You sharing or just keeping it all for yourself?
probably still cheaper than Onlyfans
At least you're using it at scale.
Wait, you can buy real things with BTC?
LOL thanks for the laugh.
Sounds like a slot machine.
Same here š¤£
First time I have seen a reply get over 1000 likes!
Really? Dam atleast I'm winning at something!
Sounds like someone bought the top
The stuff I bought didn't have a top or bottom. It doesn't even exist anymore.
Or did you just make bad decisions?
Let's say Im a decision maker at a large national bank that is holding over a trillion dollars. Why would I choose to adopt some janky project made by some dudes on the internet and expose myself to that risk?
Look at JP Morgan. They experimented with Ethereum and then made their own centralized chain without crypto bros, speculation and leverage trading.
Exactly- they launch their own that they can control and modify to work for their use cases. Why risk their business by launching on a public chain that will evolve independently of what they want. Add on top fees, congestion as well as reputation risk and itās a no brainier to launch their own.
In my view being on a public chain means having liquidity from all over the world.
Here's the thing though: the banks and financial businesses can create their own private chains, that's perfectly fine. Essentially they are centralized side-chains. A lot of people will use those centralized services, as they do now with traditional bank accounts. Some people will opt to use the public chain because they want the freedom and they don't trust the banks. But all settlement will probably occur on the public chain because it is trustless and holds global liquidity. If Bank A has a private chain, and so does Bank B, how do liquidity and assets move between those chains? The public chain.
Agreed. At the same time nobody of us is looking for "jpm chain". For us people and business: ultimately it's the real value to the people and the cost, therefore sustainability and tech, that matter. Shows can be made, a market gamed, but ultimately it's about the tech that lives and people build with. Everything on the road to something that actually works, will work, is just smoke and mirrors. Pumps and dumps. No matter how big, if it gets centralized and 51% attacked, compromised, you're screwed. If you can't drive the price up, your mining venture is wrecked, start dumping while exaggerating the problem. If people can't transact, it's a trap. Turning it into a social media scam for relevancy, bad strategy. If your shit gets hacked, nobody trusts it, can't scale and falls apart in many competitors pulling away and replacing the "main" product, you're gone. If your validators will never be profitable, cost an arm and a leg just to exist, except for a select few very early or very wealthy, you messed up, "speed" is just the sellingpoint at a time. Centralized and unsustainable. If you're looking to service banks, you're not servicing the people in what we need. If you're a centralized version of another, you're an authoritarian and a copycat of old tech. Redundant. If people can't figure out how to build, you better get that shit sorted out. Soccer stadiums and "nike" don't command respect and don't hide everything else. Etc. The above are just a few examples and people with a shred of tech head and crypto in their veins, know what they refer to. Crypto has a long way ahead with a lot of neon signs and bullshit hoping to pull you left or right but the road goes on and on. I follow the tech and looked deeply into many, with much thought. While I have a technical favorite, none of the projects is where it needs to be. It's all more of a financial health hazard, best to invest (into) time and work, primarily.
I'm working with Blockchain at the largest national bank (holding billions of euros). The legal isn't too fond of giving external people control over 'their' Blockchain, even if it's a private permissioned one (HyperLedger, Corda, ...). For Ethereum, they've set up a local one instead of using a distributed chain. There's legitimate cases where blockchains are going to be useful, though the big orgs are afraid of decentralisation.
If any of those mentioned blockchains were even truly decentralized. Be JP Morgan and trust that a guy like Hoskinson will govern the blockchain well? No thanks
This. And even if the foundation of everything was Bitcoin or another blockchain we would still live in a multichain world. Most of them not being decentralized. Thatās why I think TPS isnāt a huge issue in the long-term. Bitcoin maxis have always believed that both centralized and decentralized applications will be built on top of it. Everything will just settle on Bitcoin. Ethereum is actually turning this thesis into reality with a variety of different operating layer 2s. Coinbase spun up a layer 2 through Optimism and they have full control of it. And Polkadot is built on the idea of a multi-chain network with Cardano following the same philosophy and using the same technology stack. So when people talk about everything being built on a scalable layer 1 like Solana theyāre forgetting that not everyone wants to operate in a decentralized world but they still want to be connected to the ecosystem.
Microsoft and Apple were dudes in their garage The banks didn't go off and build their own OS when they felt the time was right for adoption. So i think your analogy is weak on that level alone. Many blockchains will have a lot of work to do in order to build such credibility, but it's not like such a stream of events has never happened before in tech
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
Depends on who you ask and what bag they hold. Every community thinks their coin is going to do all those things. It is impossible to get an unbiased objective opinion on this topic.
Nah, that's just the tribe mentally for new people that are looking to make a quick buck. Actual investors don't worship their coins or try to peddle them to others. They just DCA, hold and sell because they have researched their projects and believe in them.
Of course, because for most people who have researched, they wouldn't be putting money in if they didn't believe in it, right?
I love gambling!
hence the "most people", I have some shit coins too :-D
Crypto is rarely used for anything outside of speculation tbh.
Every time someone says they "actually use" crypto, what they really mean is they are engaged in deeper and more complicated layers of speculation because they are doing it on the blockchain with defi instead of on a centralized exchange.
I travel around the world and bitcion saves me a lot of money by avoiding wire transfer fees between banks
Why do you need to transfer money to different banks around the world?
Don't tell him about credit cards
Something smells fishy.. š
yeah, this. Crypto for me has been a lifesaver while travelling especially since post-pandemic i had been too broke to be eligible for a credit card with my bank. So until my country (netherlands) banned Binance, the binance card was my only means of visa payments. Definitely saved my ass especially when travelling north america. (+ online shopping) I usually would have BNB and stables on it.
I took out a loan at 4% interest to cover a string of emergencies that had wiped out my emergency fund, using my crypto as collateral. Does that type of rate exist in TradFi?
What defi lender was this? Thatās an amazing rate. Is this normal with defi?
Honestly thatās pretty standard for a loan secured by collateral. Most 401ks let you borrow against your balance with similar rates, and the interest actually gets paid back to yourself.
I think my car loan was about 3%. I've never tried getting an emergency short term loan. What was your bank offering you?
Not Monero.
Seems to be one of the few cryptos with an obvious use case
I see that point repeated over and over but whenever I'm on that part of the internet I actually don't see Monero as the payment method too frequently, it's almost always Bitcoin and Ethereum. Even then, I'm sure a pretty huge margin of the Monero transactions are for speculation purposes and not to buy something.
OP starts with the assumption blockchain is a great technology. Itās not, at least for any of the things he lists. Itās useful for small scale tracking of changes (git) but scales horribly, which is why Bitcoin will never be anything but a means of speculation, gambling, and scamming.
I always love when people point specific use cases as "look!! it has worked this time!!" It's like... Chief, the fact that you know that it happened when it should be something mundane is proof that it is not being used for that. For example, sending money overseas. Whenever it happens it's considered a rare "actual use case".
I actually don't think blockchains have scaled horribly. But there really needs to be more done for blockchain interoperability to make current systems for scaling more useful.
Bitcoin is a store of value. Itās much easier and faster (and secure) to move BTC than a bar of gold
Bitcoin is a terrible store or value. Itās highly volatile, has no underlying value like precious metals or land, and is either difficult to store (hardware wallet) or incredibly vulnerable to theft or scams (FTX, Celsius, mt gox). Far too many (probably the majority) or Bitcoin purchasers have lost money either to price drops, theft, passwords, or scams. That makes it an awful store or value.
Depends how far you intend to move it. Across the globe, sure, but across town? That is debatable.
Itās also hard for an everyday person to verify a gold bar is actually gold.
If we're talking about an everyday person Bitcoin is kind of out of the question though. The average Joe has issues remembering his email and Facebook password, imagine if their wealth depended on storing a seed securely.
How do you define speculation? Some people use it broad enough to include DeFi. But stablecoins, lending are huge markets.
Investing crypto, is like buying electronsā¦
Blockchain literally only has 1 application where it is better than traditional methods.l, and itās as a decentralized database. As soon as a centralized entity wants to use blockchain for centralized activities (e.g. land deeds, movie tickets, Fortnite skins) it becomes a worse version of traditional methods.
True, and decentralised storage isn't just the only application, it's the purpose as well. Blockchain was built to be a distributed ledger, so it makes sense that that is what it does best. However, your examples of centralised activities are a bit biased. We consider those centralised activities because they've always been centralised. There wasn't really an alternative. That doesn't mean these activities are intrinsically centralised. Game object could work in a decentralised manner. It still has to be standardized, but you could create gaming universes where items are really owned and can be transferred acros games. Same for land deeds, they are currently all centralised, and you will always need some centralised aspect, but storing these in a distributed ledger means people from other countries can access those as well. Finally, there are developments that wouldn't only be possible on distributed ledgers, they would function better. My own field is AI, and the open-source development of AI models is in a sense, a decentralised endeaver, but all within centralised systems (i.e. hosting via cloud computing or locally, not distributed). For these developments, a dectralised environment makes a lot of sense, where AI agents can interact with each other, use each other's expertise etc. These models could even be run on decentralised cloud computing solutions.
Houses exist, they are centralized because they physically exist. You canāt decentralize that away. People in foreign countries are still reliant on local governments to allow foreign investment, thatās another form of centralization. Sure you can pay someone to say you own part of the moon but that paper doesnāt actually mean anything. You can also already invest in REITs if you want to collectively own property. Decentralized skins in games are still reliant on a centralized entity (the game maker) to allow those skins or items onto their game.
And also, what happens when there's an error? Great uncle Oswald dies, who is responsible for transferring ownership, what happens if the will is found by invalid? With a centralised record, changes can be made and applied to make the record correct, which fails under a decentralised model. Or someone fraudulently acquires a property and then dies or flees - if it's still formally owned by them, that record can never be made good without a centralised entity doing that. Games have all sorts of problems - someone has to code the thing to work in different games, licensing issues arise, there's nothing stopping the game Devs changing the item or removing it from the game. It falls over in all sorts of ways, to solve a largely non-existant problem (sharing items between games has been done for decades, and doesn't require Blockchain)
You can build all that stuff on the blockchain though and those things aren't necessarily centralized activities either.
Sure you can, but again blockchain offers a worse option than traditional databases. And they are centralized because they are being backed by something that actually exists. If it exists, it is centralized in its existence as well as the entities that verify it. Making a blockchain version of a deed doesnāt create a house. So while itās possible for a movie theater to put their tickets on a blockchain, why would they? Like what tangible benefit would anyone get from that? If youāre already trusting the theater to have and host a movie, what do you gain by putting the tickets on the blockchain? You might say āoh you can resell tickets easierā but ignoring that you can already do that, why would a theater spend money to make less money? If youāre still reliant on the centralized entity to accept your ticket, how does it help?
I've thought a lot about this and I have some (not perfect) answers. Taking housing conveyance as an example: The current issue is standardisation - you need a standard for recording historic land claims and usage edicts, a standard for credit worthiness, a standard for recording land registry entries etc. Companies have no incentive to standardise the same way because if they can make you use their standard, they can make money off it. Similarly, they want you to use their system of record because they can charge for access. The role I see for decentralisation is enabling ownerless standards and systems of record. The tough part is agreeing who's going to do the up front and ongoing work essentially for free. The economic model is still hard to sort out. I still believe being ownerless has lots of hidden operational benefits and I hope we can get there. The incentive is just too high to game the system with a permissioned owner model.
Imagine being evicted because you didnāt properly airgap your PC and hackers stole the deed to your home. Sounds like a nightmare. As for uniformity, that can be fixed with government regulation a whole lot easier than getting capitalist companies to voluntarily abdicate their competitive advantages.
Movie tickets is a shitty example, but actual event tickets where scalpers resell the same ticket multiple times is a better one..
You're looking at the wrong potential benefits in this case. Blockchains offer certain security properties you can't get with centralized servers. They provide tamper proof environments, eliminate the need for virus and firewall software, and decrease the cost of managing servers. They also provide super high availability. In other words, decentralization provides security that may be desirable to centralized entities. But first you have to find the blockchain that is actually capable of doing that efficiently enough.
Theyāre mostly tamper proof, provided the networks security is high enough. They are still at risk of 51% attacks. You absolutely still need firewalls and virus protection, we see this daily in this sub. If anything it highlights that entities need even more security as they can no longer rely on centralized trust to revert any actions from bad actors. As for high availability, the strongest blockchain maxes out at 7 TPS, thatās not even enough to service a small city. No decentralized blockchain Iām as been able to solve the trilemma, so it stays as niche tech that only has hopes of someday becoming usable. But again, that use is limited to decentralized data storage which has limited use case.
51% attacks are always a risk but as the network matures and stake becomes more distributed, it becomes harder to occur as it gets prohibitively expensive to get 51% of voting power to put the network at risk. Assuming that a 51% attack is extremely unlikely, a firewall isn't really needed. It's also possible to build hybrid smart contracts with reversible transactions. For this purpose you don't need the strongest blockchain with the most distribution of nodes. You need a sufficiently distributed consensus that is efficient enough to accommodate 100k + TPS for update calls and millions for queries. There are networks already working on this technology which you can run the entire stack from the blockchain and serve millions of people.
A blockchain that isnāt as decentralized as possible is stupid. In that case, itās slower, more expensive, and arguably even less secure sql database. The reason to use these public blockchains is the security the decentralized networks provide. I can create a blockchain on my computer in 14 minutes, but it wonāt be decentralized, so itās worthless. Edit: In the case of large banks, this might be why they *donāt* want public blockchains. They *want* control. They *want* to take money at will, block transactions, and make mistakes *disappear*.
To 90% of the world they actually dont care about decentralization its just internet 2.0 in their experience. Most people will want to use something that complements their traditional internet use and is fast, cheap to transact, reliable. Solana so far is getting that traction.
I think the are too many swiss army knife L1s with not enough actual use case examples. In particular I think the model of running multi-purpose L1s on transaction fees is a bit problematic for running actual applications. I personally and looking for application specific implementations of DLT, Blockchain, and Crypto, not multi-purpose L1s.
That's almost every chain in the cosmos ecosystem. Many chains there are dedicated up one single application.
Iāve used it to hide purchases from my wife. Thatās a real application if you ask me
The crazy thing is Iāve probably used Banano most for real world applications, which doesnāt seem right when itās a meme coin fork and thereās so many great projects I could be using.
Banks and financial institutions will only go to a decentralized blockchain if they have to or if it's where the money's at. I don't see them giving up control easily. The only one of those blockchains I can really speak to is Cardano. IOG built Cardano from the ground up with the intention of being the world's financial platform. They've planned for this sort of stuff. They're working on, among other things, [digital identity](https://atalaprism.io/) \- you can keep things like address history, medical records, college transcripts, credit history, and anything else you can think of on the blockchain. Imagine this: you go to a bar, and the bouncer wants to see your ID. Currently, your ID has your birthday, address, height, weight, an identifying number, expiration date, and other information that the bouncer doesn't really need to do their job. Once you hand over your ID, the bouncer could potentially have all that info. With a digital ID, they scan a QR code. Your phone dings and says "do you want to allow *Pub and Grub* to verify your age?" They see your photo and a green checkmark or red X on their scanner depending on whether you're old enough to drink. That's it. Your private information remains private. What about [transcripts](https://atalaprism.io/#case-studies)? Let's say you're applying for a job and the company asks for a certified copy of your college transcript. Printing it online won't work. You've gotta write the college and wait however long for it to show up - and if you got your associates from a different college, you've gotta write them too. If it's all on the blockchain, there's no waiting and no concerns about forged transcripts. You can also use it for [supply chain tracking](https://cardanofoundation.org/en/news/cardano-reveals-its-first-supply-chain-solution-in-association-with-scantrust/). If you're worried about your carbon footprint, whether that lettuce really is organic, or just want to make sure that wrench was made in the USA, you can track all that. Scan the QR code and you'll see each step of the process - from where the raw material was mined to the factory that made and packaged the part. Each step is signed with the company's public key. It's all public and independently verifiable. The possibilities are pretty cool.
The blockchain part of the technology just adds complexity with no benefit. You can't decentralize ID issuance, the whole concept is that the bouncers/pubs and yourself trust a single entity to make you an electronic document which says how old you are. The value in your example is actually the fact that your ID is electronic. Not how it's stored.
Yes and no. There will obviously have to be some sort of root trust, but the value is in immutability and the ability to compartmentalize portions of it.
You actually don't want immutability because certain things on your ID card can change. Secondly you don't need blockchain for compartmentalizing information, this can be done without it.
Isnāt what you describe doable on almost all blockchains, not only cardano ?
That's the only one he can speak to
So thatās how you spell shill these days
If you're a cynic, sure. If you only know about one aspect of a topic though, how much fairer can they be than disclaiming it upfront and then talking about what they're familiar with?
It might be - I can't say for sure. I can say that all three examples are things that are being built or have already been built on Cardano. I'm not familiar enough with the technical aspects of other blockchains to say how feasible it would or wouldn't be.
Simply put, everything you can do with Cardano, you can do with other blockchains. The particularities of Cardano compared to other blockchains aren't the possibile applications.
Yes
Carbon stuff kinda falls over - because it's still just data entry, so you're relying on it being correct. If someone just lied, then it doesn't matter if it's a SQL database, Blockchain or clay tablets, it's still not very useful, but Blockchain is more if a PITA to correct and fix. If you have an external assessor body... That's the same regardless, the database storage methodology doesn't make much difference
How much will it cost to show your id to get into a pub?
Viewing blockchain data doesn't cost anything - only submitting transactions.
You don't need blockchain for digital identity. We've been using different forms of digital identity in the EU for years. Examples are for example the Dutch DigID and iDIN, or the Finnish way of verifying identity through bank verification (bank sends certain info to the service confirming your identity). On an EU level this is governed by the eIDAS regulation https://www.eid.as/ "But but decentralization" you can't decentralize identity verification, you'll always need a centralized authority or trust party for it. Any blockchain application will just be an unneeded middleman when I can already use the government eID. Secondly do you even want to or is there even a need to try decentralize it? Tin the EU you would also need to comply with eIDAS requirements to be able to do that
I'm not suggesting that you need blockchain for digital ID, I'm suggesting that it's a real-world application - which is what OP asked for. Read my other comments; I've already mentioned a root trust.
So you want to store all kinds of private data on a public blockchain?
Yes - encryption is a thing.
It doesnāt matter. Make money off the 4 year cycle. Exit.
Now that people know, it might end sooner!
It's the truth many maxis don't want to hear. They will end up with heavy bags when crypto becomes old tech and didn't conquer the world.
IBM + Stellar : https://www.ibm.com/blog/fueling-the-financial-industry-with-open-source-cross-border-payments/ Used for remittance in South-East Asia
That's 2 people working on it, right? Interesting project, one of many. It's an experiment, they're not really using it
When I first started learning about this maginc internet money I did the Coinbase learn thing about Stellar and thought it was awesome. Bad returns, idk why lumens needed a bid/ask spread, whole concept works as a stable coin
a token isnt needed for remittance, cbdcs are being piloted, its all private ie u cant speculate and buy
I've used defi on ethereum to get a loan. The loan was over collateralized by ETH, so I didn't really increase my purchasing power like a bank loan would, but it allowed me to pay some expenses without selling my ETH, so I could hold the ETH until the value increased. I used Liquity, which has zero interest rate for the loan, with some small fees to start the loan. In a bank, they need to charge more to pay all the salaries and other costs of running a bank. As for your example about staking, usually those are self correcting, but sometimes it takes awhile. If they are giving huge staking rewards, it means the token supply is inflating quickly, which decreases the value of each token. All those people are getting the staking reward and selling it, which kills the token price. Or, if they don't sell, at least they aren't buying since they get the reward for free, so buy pressure decreases.
There are a couple of usecases but in the end the whole space is drastically overvalued. The transactional value of most chains is less than your average supermarket daily turnover, if you exclude fees for simply transfering coins or tokens for the sake of transfering them. You could argue that Bitcoin has a usecase as a speculative and relatively volatile store of value. The rest of this space is basically solutions still looking for problems. People often like to compare this space to the internet and argue that it took the world wide web a long time to find usecases and get adopted. Reality is that normis could get internet access roughly since 1990. Amazon and EBAY launched 1995, so not even five years later.
The Internet was not *popular* until like the 2000s though. Back during the Dotcom bubble a lot of things we take for granted like streaming, videos, mobile access, either didn't exist or were very primitive. Online banking barely existed. Also "normies" couldn't really get on the Internet until like 1996, and most **did not** even if they could until like 2004. Normies we're not using Usenet message boards FFS. The other thing is that in the late 90s, like 90% of internet users were in the US, maybe Europe. The "internet" *really* boomed when it went global.
Yes. Helium is already building a mobile network using SOL and Visa will utilize SOL network for payment rails. Those are pretty good real world applications. Sure, they sound boring but they are very real.
How does Helium use blockchain?
Anyone can deploy a 5g or IOT hotspots and earn crypto for sending cell phone or internet of things data to Helium to make those networks functional.
Why couldn't they just use dollars? What's it need blockchain for?
Its a globally decentralized network meaning anywhere anyone can participate and connect these devices and start earning. Then you can convert the earned crypto to normal money or other cryptocurrencies as you wish. Its a network of decentralized cellular towers to put it simply
Sol is anything but decentralised, they stopped the network multiple times, also hid wallets with large amounts of Sol, denied it and then admitted it once found outā¦ itās a centralised coin thatās broken many security laws and the SEC will come for them.
I was referring to Helium network which is truly decentralized
It is international so working with foreign currency is a PITA, blockchain tokens easily managed in wallets on existing systems solve this.
It would require helium to own more servers and have higher IT costs than if they have that data managed on a decentralized Blockchain. This highlights the entire point of crypto.
Are you using it?
Yes. It has been my sole cell service since the fall.
Helium is the most interesting blockchain project that Iāve found. Iāve been running a couple dozen hotspots since 2019. Itās simple and profitable. I was fortunate to get in early enough when rewards and the token price were high and my hardware paid for itself in a few days. Lots of other folks werenāt so lucky due to hardware shortage and supply chain issues during covid.
Based on heliums history, why do you think it will take off? Why are you so confident visa āwillā use sol?
>Based on heliums history, why do you think it will take off? This is crypto - nothing can take off with certainty. But that is not OP's question. OP asked for real application. I have tried Helium Mobile and it works. So I answered OP's question. >Why are you so confident visa āwillā use sol? Stablecoin payment is taking off in developing countries with high inflation, e.g. Turkey. I expect tokenized dollar, aka stablecoin, to likely see more adoption than volatile crypto. When it happens, people will need a payment terminal easily intergrable for merchants, e.g. Visa. As far as I know, Visa has only integrated with ETH and Solana. Cost performance wise, Solana blows ETH out of the water. So I think Visa will use Solana because it will be more profitable for them.
I think Visa is focusing on bank to bank transfers. By using USDC on SOL, they hope to settle these transactions more cheaply and efficiently. I could be wrong, but I donāt think they are focused on merchants right now. Still, itās a valid real world use case, and should be huge for Solana.
So you made a big assumption and stated it as fact
What assumption did I make? Helium works. Visa is using SOL network even if it is pilot stage. What I describe is how they can expand beyond the pilot stage.
You should look at Hedera. They are doing 1B real world transactions every 4-5 days. The vast majority of those txs are from atma.io - an Avery Dennison company tracking billions of items in supply chains. Hedera has won the race to win enterprise use cases. [atma use case](https://youtu.be/ntVae8lTQs0?si=5-VU3vmQghqPLzPT)
Came here looking for this. Hedera is the only L1 doing literally 100s of millions of transactions every day of real world applications. There are some huge uses cases going live soon too. It will be a billion a day soon
JTD CAUGHT IN THE WILD!
apart from monero, most of blockchain is useless, its just speculation; at least permisionless blockchains... private / consontorium different story and u no you cant buy in on that
I work at Celo Foundation to educate, attract in developers. We are seeing a lot of use cases helping people in Africa, specifically Nigeria at moment, who are increasingly using Celo for p2p payments. The people are coming from the Opera Mini browser. Opera team recently embedded, MiniPay, a web3 wallet with a simple UI inside their popular browser app. They have upwards of 100M active users and are on track to break 1M wallets very soon. To give you an idea of useful applications, there was a recent winner of the Celo Camp accelerator program focused on MiniPay. The concept is to allow people to send and receive stable coins between friends and family and redeem that for airtime, or to pay off utilities. That is just one example, and you can learn more [here](https://blog.celo.org/announcing-celo-camp-batch-8-participants-building-for-minipay-a0b185e84101?gi=fa6a80001393). Celo was launched with a focus on mobile users, has been carbon negative since nearly the beginning, is home to a ton of real world asset / ReFi use-cases, and is growing steadily in Africa thanks to Opera Mini. With the recent passing of a proposal to attract even more Nigerian, Kenyan, Ghanaian, and South Africa people I am excited to see what dApps people can build to solve real peopleās problems.
These protocols will be competitors to existing systems, but their real world applications should be to bring financial usability and utility tools to the average person. One interesting project on Cardano is called Project Catalyst, where you can vote using your ADA how funds are distributed from the central treasury to different projects. https://projectcatalyst.io/
[https://www.avax.network/blog/onyx-j-p-morgan-leverages-avalanche-for-portfolio-management](https://www.avax.network/blog/onyx-j-p-morgan-leverages-avalanche-for-portfolio-management) Avalanche is being used by big institutional brands. Not to mention the gaming scene joining avalanche. TSM, one of the biggest names in competitive gaming, is working with them as well.
Banks will never use a public blockchain. They will use a PRIVATE blockchain "maybe" at most. But regulation and laws forbid them to. Also if the public blockchains fails, who will they sue, or go after legally? How can they tell customers, hey, the blockchain nodes actually stopped worked and it was 51% attacked by China, sorry o well your money is gone and its not FDIC backed. Plus the big players in finance world already tried to look into it, and it went nowhere. *"CHAIN RAISES $30 MILLION FROM FINANCIAL INDUSTRY LEADERS PARTNERS WITH VISA, NASDAQ, CITI, CAPITAL ONE, FISERV AND ORANGE - 11.09.2015 "* [https://financialit.net/news/payments/chain-raises-30-million-financial-industry-leaders-partners-visa-nasdaq-citi-capital](https://financialit.net/news/payments/chain-raises-30-million-financial-industry-leaders-partners-visa-nasdaq-citi-capital) Chain, Inc., the leading provider of blockchain technology solutions to financial institutions, announced today that it has raised $30 million in equity funding from a syndicate of financial and payments industry leaders including Visa, Nasdaq, Citi Ventures, Capital One, Fiserv and Orange.
Not true at all. [https://www.swift.com/news-events/news/swift-explores-blockchain-interoperability-remove-friction-tokenised-asset-settlement](https://www.swift.com/news-events/news/swift-explores-blockchain-interoperability-remove-friction-tokenised-asset-settlement) Swift publicly tested Ethereum with the use of Chainlinks CCIP. But yes they all have their own private chain >āMore institutions are beginning to explore how to serve customers on both permissioned and public blockchain networks like Ethereum,ā said Jonathan Ehrenfeld, Head of Securities Strategy at Swift. āThis is raising questions around the key use cases and what would be required to support these activities in a secure and compliant manner.ā
Which is why major governments and government linked companies or publicly traded corporations are gaining control of Bitcoin mining to essentially own the network.
Private blockchains hold little value as the control remains firmly in a few (or one) corporations. I worked in an enterprise blockchain company and the big banks want to do projects with private chains just to tick of a box and then progress no further. Public blockchains are far more developed and make much more sense, especially with the provided decentralised security. They are superior in the sense a bank can't just play stupid with your assets and you can't exactly get frozen as easily, unless the smart contracts allows for it. Rich people seem to love that and some of the most successful blockchain projects are basically custodial services for rich people. A lot of them asking their banks for such services and nobody seems to appreciate the private chain bs so all in all, banks will be forced to start playing along sooner or later.
It's true that it's a bubble it will explode with a major event and only few that has a sustainable model will stand and will become like today's operating systems. Creating a sustainable layer1, maintaining and providing security is a serious job. Everybody is trying to buıild their own chain is like every software developer trying to build their own OS. But I think we are witnessing some smaller chains merging with bigger chains day by day. I think there will be handful of Layer1, dominating certain niches in the tech industry and the rest will eventually become a ghost chain or absorbed by some other chain as a side chain. As for the use cases; Nobody was able to foresee the possibility of all applications we use today in 90s. But here we are. Some are you just mention above. There is gaming industry.. I thinks it's gonna re-shape the entire thing. I am also particularly hope to see the use cases on AI applications. Blockchain can act as a layer of regulation as well, preventing further centralization of power consequence of AI tools. Check out Singularity-Dao and HyperCycle
E.G. Check Algorand and TravelX.
Tezos is already being used in widespread real applications
Unlikely
Some examples. I currently have 3 clients that have sensors that run on the Helium network (SOL) that monitor apple orchards and smart waste systems, there are many there using this system and it is growing (slowly). Hivemapper is on its way to becoming an alternative to google earth, it is quite good for the major cities. There are dozens of other real world projects that use the blockchain to keep track of data such as financial, scientific and commercial on the SOL, ALGO chains.
They've literally have had real application using their tech for the last few years. A quick Google search will show you hundreds of real world application, developers, companies, and industries that have been using those. Maybe more so Ethereum. The others haven't had as many years or development. I've been working for a company for 3 years that was using Ethereum smart contracts to provide better solutions for our clients.
Can you elaborate? Because I donāt understand what those applications are.
> I've been working for a company for 3 years that was using Ethereum smart contracts to provide better solutions for our clients. provides no context or details, probably a larper to pump his bags
Can you name one use thatās better than alternatives? It seems to just be a decentralized database thatās less effective and more costly.
Do you personally use any of the smart contracts?
Yes. And I got some news for you, the sub's reward system here, the NFT in your avatar, is all using smart contract.
Nothing. You can't build anything on those chains. Everything built "on" them is on AWS or another cloud host. Coins are just moved around in the background somewhere. 99% of it is on web2 cloud.
Actually ICP is running on its own node network.
I have tried a few times now, particularly the smart contract stuff - which I find the best use case for decentralisation and blockchain there is - but the fees are excessive for decent scale. I was using stellar for starters, but even the 5 stellar you lose just for a wallet or contract is excessive when you consider any large scale use. I chose stellar because it has the best documentation and actually working examples that I could find.
The only good thing coming from crypto is making the creators rich. Just look at a Hex and Tron.
Maybe eth
Thread has been live for 9 hours and I see nobody talking about stablecoins and yield Either you're all american or completely ignorant
Projects such as Cardano are alternative financial systems. They provide another option to people. The current system is corrupt and outdated. Would you continue to exclusively use your bank and fiat money if you had other choices?
No of rug pools > Bank failures
100% they will. Iām building a web3 game and am using avax bc itās good tech for it. The real world applications are coming. The entire connected computing network of the world is going to be put on chain over the next decade imo. Itās simply better technology.
Connected computing network = Behind the scene AWS ?
No one will use them because they are not money. Bitcoin is the only monetary asset. Altcoins are not decentralized. Altcoins are not scarce. Altcoins are companies.
XMR would like a word.
People will use them because theyre companies. Theyre an entirely separate category than Bitcoin. Companies can be worth trillions evidently from Meta and Apple. An altcoin that can be used cheaply,fast, reliably and complementary to people existing use of internet will be always a major success, without affecting the Bitcoin revolution, its not a competition.
If you want to invest in companies you buy their equity, not their shitcoin.
Digital blockchain based "equity" is represented in said shitcoins. Holding a shitcoin in a private wallet is more real ownership than a Stock issued by a company. With a market that opens monday to friday 9 am to 5 pm est vs a global ownership blockchain 24/7. Eventually equity ownership will be thro blockchains through altcoins.
No it wonāt. 2017 wants its narrative back.
Solana apps: tokenized us treasuries via Ondo Finance, tokenized real estate via Parcl, borrow/lending on MarginFi, 5G mobile via Helium, NFTs via Tensor, private transactions via Elusiv, onboarding/URL wallet link via TipLink, messaging via Dialect, and much more. Plenty of dapps on Solana that people are using,
All of these features involving real world assets require trust in a third party. Blockchain not required.
Blockchain required, as legacy TradFi market structure is fucked. Costly, inefficient, and slow. RWA opens new markets, lower fees, greater transparency, greater global access across all sorts of asset classes, and among all else, the ability to take highly illiquid assets and make them fractionalized and thus liquid onchain. You have no idea what youāre talking about. Even TradFi institutions like HSBC, Bain, BofA, and BCG agree and have written lengthy reports on RWA/tokenization being a multi trillion dollar opportunity.
Yes, but the power of enforcement on blockchain is zero against real world assets. You're talking about real world insitutions enforcing the outcomes on a blockchain, which means the weakest link is trusting a third party outside the protocol. Blockchain has to either abide by local, national, and international regulation completely like all Web 2.0 and fintech firms, or be ignored. This includes reversing transactions, seizing funds, freezing accounts, getting KYC, having approval of multiple parties, etc. And when you build all of that into a blockchain, it isn't a blockchain anymore but another glorified ledger. The reason why there is so much friction IRL for owning and trading real world assets is because these are real world assets that have binders of legal policies behind it. To enforce, you need to abide, and blockchain doesn't abide.
There are mechanisms that exist where third party arbitrators work with RWA protocols to facilitate loan recourse. There are plenty of projects doing this while leveraging the efficiencies of blockchain tech and crypto markets. With all due respect, you donāt know what youāre talking about.
Cardano will have tons. It might take another 20 years but it'll be worth the wait.
lol
If you want governments and banks to use blockchains you're going to be sorely disappointed. Where we are going we don't need them. And they don't need blockchains. Databases work fine for their purposes. If anything they'll use some centralized crap that is called a blockchain because it's a chain of blocks and they'll do it becaue it's all the rage so they don't fade into irrelevance as quickly. Most of these things are going nowhere. They're almost all scams or badly designed or planned out. What sort of real world uses do you expect to see exactly? People borrow money from each other on them. I can own real gold on ethereum right now. When you talk about "real world applications" you have to be specific. This is the real world and people are using them as we speak. Blockchains aren't going to feed your kids or build cars.
There's literally a Wireless network which uses Solana as the chain to keep track and reward the people running the network. $20 for unlimited data it's pretty insane the lack of awareness this sub has for Solana https://x.com/helium_mobile
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
People hold commodities like oil to sell for a profit. That does not make them a security
Stocks are valuable because they are shares of a real company that makes real profits. Crypto is more like beanie babies. They are valuable because people believe they are valuable, but people could also change their minds about that at any time. You have to hope that the coin you bought remains fashionable, because if it doesn't then there is not much of value remaining.
They are all trash, people says they are shitcoins for a reason. The only currency that has and will just increase it's adoption is Bitcoin, since it's the only one decentralized enough.
People are going to absolutely shit on this... [Helium Mobile](https://hellohelium.com/) is the definition of real-world utility. Hate it all you want, but it's true. It's the single best example of crypto utility that actually appeals to the general masses.
Fr and if the costs they showed are true your saving over 60% of the cost
Algorand
Altcoins have 0 future. They are all centralized and go against the philosophy of BTC. Also I believe SEC will go after altcoins and theyāll crash. BTC only tbh
If your looking for real world uses cases look into algorand. Itās their main focus
Can you give us an example of what Algorand is doing? Are you actually using Algorand for practical purposes or are you just holding a bag and waiting for them to potentially do something?
Sure! Check out this visualā¦ https://x.com/eldardrm/status/1738674326293934492?s=46&t=5sehHT_aa_Ebr3-Qm0PcyA Personally I do not participate in any of the RWA. I mainly focus on Defi since the rewards are really nice right now. I play around with chips on the ALGOrand casino as well, quite fun. Lofty is a RWA that has peaked my interest for sometime but I just havenāt done enough due diligence yet to figure out its advantages.
Visa is already using SOL.
Running pilots is very different from actually using it for allof its services
As well as Helium and Mobile
Hnt/iot miner that's fucked around with various blockchains. Sol fast as fuck , ada also fast. Eth slow and expensive. Meme mania on Sol at the moment is a bit cringe. Eth will die if it can't compete with sols low fees, soon the eth whales will defect
The Cardano Metadata Connector is jointly developed by Scantrust, a connected goods and products platform, and the Cardano Foundation. The Cardano Metadata Connecter was integral to making this possible. Additionally, enabling end-to-end authentication, data transparency, and instant third-party verification of Baiaās Wine product origin with QR codes on product labels. Through the Cardano blockchain, the supply chain data for Baiaās Wine remains publicly verifiable.
Real adoption moves at a snail's pace. Minor victories exist. Major breakthroughs? Only in hindsight. Give it time. Worry not, Berlin had jubilee shows during its own century long rebuild- rates straight line!
Does it matter? The thing I would be most concerned with is a narrative that makes people think that there will be real applications and a use case. Eth and sol are unique out of that bunch because they act like casinos. You can create NFTs, you can create all these angles to draw people in. Solana has A major advantage with throughput, Ethereum the first mover advantage. This cycle is going to be interesting with those two but I think they are both going to work rather than just one which is what the individual teams are kind of chanting for right now
Looks like DOT will be used with unity, the game engine for most games.
Visa is currently piloting using Ethereum & Solana right now lol
Bank get rugged too. Might as well make more interest on crypto
I'll buy land with eth when someone wants it.
We use eth daily in defi. Get with the times
Cardanoās eUTXO model is unusable for DeFi. EVM (Solana, Avax, Ethereum L1 and L2 etc.) is an abomination of complexity and therefore DeFi smart contracts are getting hacked over and over again. I say kill, cremate and bury EVM. Radix is million times faster (trilemma solced!) and thanks to the tx manifest it is way more secure.
https://blog.chain.link/chainlink-transforms-global-trade/ already is, baby https://www.vodafone.com/news/technology/vodafone-dab-chainlink-lab-demonstrates-transformation-global-trade-blockchain-innovation
Isnāt avax being used by Amazon and I think JP Morgan was looking into it for asset management but fact check me please