Here is a link to the article mentioned in the video:
In this video I discuss how one of the founders of Internet Computer calls most blockchains junk. It is taking a look at things from a technical angle.
I opt for a differenet viewpoint, not trying to debate the technical side of things. Instead, we look at the essence of where Web3 is succeeding as compared to where it is falling short.
▶️ 3Speak
I would argue that 5% is actually quite good.
The cutting edge of tech is always going to be 95% garbage.
Ask any venture capital investor.
I think of tokens as communities. Just because a random village in Uganda has no value to the world economy doesn't mean we should run around trying to colonize and centralize the world into an empire. That's exactly what we are trying to get away from.
The meme-coins and all the other garbage projects out there are casino outlets for new-money millionaires with a real function: to continue allowing them to spend their money and staying entertained while not leaving the network that made them rich. Until we actually build something better this is what we have. It is delusional thinking to just decide that these people need to leave their communities and spend their money elsewhere. That's not how this works.
Perhaps what we really need is better interoperability.
I would agree that 5% is not a bad percentage.
As for the gist of what you are saying, he is talking more technology but you are right. Until something is built, people will simply continue to do what they are doing. There is no reason to change.
Price action tells us nothing. Yahoo at $475 during the dotcom bubble ought to tell people that.
Hang around markets long enough and you see how neurotic they are. Ultimately, they tell us little about the value of what something has.
Wow! ICP! Impressive price action for a blockchain that claims to be a "third generation." I wonder how many gained and lost their money from that 400 USD ATH down to 13.47 USD now?
Commendable goals:
to dismantle big tech monopolies
to overhaul the conventional cloud service model, and
to create a more decentralized global network.
Aren't these our goals also here on Hive?
The battle between "compelling narratives" and "technological innovation," does not Hive have both?
So you base the value of something based upon market action? That is ridiculous.
In April 99, Amazon was $4.30, by March 2001, it was 49 cents.
How big a loss is that? What did price action tells us there.
Markets tell you nothing.
I am just stating the facts mentioned in the article. Though I believe in Hive's value proposition, I cannot ignore the excitement that price appreciation gives.
If we are just talking about the main crypto, I doubt he would say this. But since there are a lot of meme and shit coins, with more being made almost every week, I think I agree. A lot of coins are useless, and have no purpose other than a pump and dump. Those that have purpose though are worth it.
ICP token is currently backed by an YouTube and hive influencer called @jerrybanfield so if the CEO is saying this may be there is some truth behind it all.
Summary:
The video discusses the founder of the Internet Computer's statement that 25% of blockchains are "junk" and "selling snake oil." The host agrees with the general sentiment, though he acknowledges he lacks the technical expertise to fully evaluate the specific claims.
The host then provides a broader critique of the state of the crypto/Web3 ecosystem. He argues that while blockchain technology has found some success in the financial realm, many other use cases like social media and gaming have struggled to deliver on the promises of decentralization. The host believes that the conditioning of users to expect free services, combined with the inherent costs of running decentralized infrastructure, makes it difficult for Web3 applications to gain mainstream adoption.
The host cites the example of trying to build a decentralized social media platform on Ethereum, where each user action would incur a transaction fee. He contends this model is incompatible with user expectations. The host also discusses how censorship and control by centralized entities remains a concern, and that truly decentralized, immutable platforms may be needed to address this issue.
Overall, the video provides a critical analysis of the current state of the crypto/Web3 space, highlighting the challenges many projects face in transitioning users away from the free, centralized services they are accustomed to.
Detailed Analysis:
The host begins by discussing a quote from the founder of the Internet Computer project, who claims that 25% of blockchains are "junk" and "selling snake oil." While the host acknowledges he lacks the technical expertise to fully evaluate this specific claim, he agrees with the general sentiment.
The host then delves into a broader critique of the crypto/Web3 ecosystem. He argues that while blockchain technology has found some success in the financial realm, where transaction fees are an accepted part of the user experience, many other use cases have struggled to deliver on the promises of decentralization.
The host points to the issues faced by the Bitcoin network, which he says is primarily used for financial transactions and has not seen significant adoption in other areas. He also criticizes the Ethereum network, noting that despite years of development and the transition to proof-of-stake, it still faces scaling problems and high transaction fees.
The host then shifts his focus to the broader Web3 ecosystem, arguing that much of what is being built on top of these blockchain networks is "garbage." He contends that the fundamental issue is the mismatch between user expectations and the inherent costs of running decentralized infrastructure.
Using the example of social media, the host explains that in a traditional Web2 model, the platform provider (e.g., Facebook) absorbs the costs of running the servers and infrastructure, monetizing the user data and activity through advertising. In a Web3 model, where the goal is to decentralize these services, each user action would incur a transaction fee, which the host believes is incompatible with user expectations of free services.
The host also discusses the issue of censorship, arguing that as governments become more tyrannical, the need for truly decentralized, immutable platforms will only grow. He suggests that solutions like Rumble, which are often touted as alternatives to centralized platforms like YouTube, are not sufficient, as they still rely on centralized infrastructure.
Throughout the video, the host emphasizes that the conditioning of users to expect free services, combined with the inherent costs of running decentralized infrastructure, makes it difficult for many Web3 applications to gain mainstream adoption. He believes that outside of the financial realm, the promises of Web3 are largely "snake oil," and that the exposure of these issues will gradually peel back the layers of hype surrounding the space.