Can I clarify what I think is a fundamental difference from SuperNET?
BlockNET is collecting money through the ITO for development. SuperNET ICO funds will be used to purchase shares in coins and revenue-generating assets. (It is also entering into revenue-share agreements, of course, without taking an equity stake.) BlockNET is presumably relying on revenue sharing with its partners?
If that's the case, then there is an obvious distinction in the type of organisations they are, reflected in the NAV, risk, reward and approach to growth of each (and consequently appealing to different demographics).
Is this correct?
i'd be interested in hearing thoughts on this..
Same here. Inquiring minds want to know.
"The Blocknet has its own token of value. However it is not a coin but a share that earns dividends on every payment for every service on the Blocknet.
Every time a service is rendered, the node(s) rendering the service receive payment directly from the node(s) that request it, and the Blocknet charges a micro-fee for supporting the service.
Shareholders are eligible for payouts in proportion to the number of shares they own - the accounting for which is of course done trustlessly and in the public domain."
Hi all
Apologies for the delay in answering this question. I've been very busy (read: slightly overwhelmed) with background stuff.
The initial question above approximately supplies its own answer. There's not a whole lot to add to it really, but I'll try break it down a little bit.
SuperNET:
- funds were used to purchase participating currencies to back the SuperNET's value
- and to create various assets
Blocknet:
- funds are used to develop a lot of next-gen software (i.e. the XBridge, decentralised exchange, application platform, etc.)
- funds will be used to enter the B2B market for various services (expect an executive summary regarding this pretty soon, which will include budgetary information and a roadmap)
- BLOCK-holder profits come directly from the intrinsic functioning of the Blocknet - i.e. through the rendering of services
So in comparison:
- SuperNET is a make-money-with-money sort of project, whereas the Blocknet is a more straightforward software platform development project, coupled with make-money-from-services model for token holders.
- SuperNET backs its value with assets (I've previously opined that this adds risk due to centralisation), whereas the Blocknet's value is a function of the value of its services.
Feel free to add to this and build out the comparison. No doubt there are additional elements that could be included.
SuperNET is a make-money-with-services as well.
Thank you! I think that's a useful way to distinguish them.
It is worth saying that SuperNET will also include some impressive next-gen tech too (decentralised trustless and extremely private communication and transactions, instant cross-blockchain exchange, provably random p2p dice game etc), which James and others are building for free - or, at least, in return for a proportion of assets. So I suppose the pay model approximates the overall model as an equity stake.
Both, of course, look to leverage network effect and reward strong tech.
Depending on where each end up, it would be wrong to assume that collaboration is impossible. There could be significant opportunities for both in the future. It will be interesting to see where they each end up; I suspect they might not compete as much as some people think.
Thanks for the contributions here. Nice one.
Yes, the SuperNET certainly will have some next-gen tech.
Speaking of which, I'll be updating the OP soon to reflect a number of conversations I've had on the differences between the Blocknet's and SuperNET's tech. My opinion is that the Blocknet's approach is truly P2P (rather than using RPC calls for a specific function) and that its mesh+DHT approach is superior to a straight DHT approach. Expect this OP update soon.
On the topic of collaboration, personally I'd love it if SuperNET wallets get XBridges at some point. There's a clear benefit to that.
And I expect us to both benefit from each other's code from time to time as the two projects develop. This is one of many ways in which competition can be mutually beneficial.