Somebody asked me to comment on Polkadot.
The white paper is written by Gavin Wood, founder of Ethereum & Parity. This is obviously a credible developer. It passes my first filter with flying colors. It also passes my second filter.
However, I don’t know if it passes my third filter. It is filled with technical features and functions, but little explanation of the benefits. It wants to connect (bridge) different blockchains, which will enable scaling, which is a good thing. However, to do so would be an incredibly difficult task and I question if Polkadot will be able to pull it off. Hopefully, they’ll prove me wrong.
There is another project that is trying to connect different blockchains together, as well, but I forget the name.
If Polkadot wanted people, other than blockchain developers to understand their project, they should’ve done a better job of explaining the problem(s) that they are trying to solve and the benefits of solving those problems to non-technical people. But, do they need to? I don’t see any info about ICO or token sale. Maybe they have enough money from their ETH holdings that they don’t need funding.
One interesting excerpt from the white paper is this:
I’m not quite sure how the Polkadot tokens will go up in value. For any token or coin to go up in value, the usage or demand must go up. Bitcoin is going up because people are throwing money into it to store value. Ethereum is going up because people are throwing money into it, in order to buy tokens at ICOs. What will be the fuel for Polkadot?
If it is indeed Gavin Wood running this project, then it is obviously not a scam or crap. It’s just hard to quantify the benefits of holding Polkadot tokens.
Though, there is one minor stain on Gavin. Someone hacked $32 million from Parity. Who hacked it? Was it an inside job?
The white paper is written by Gavin Wood, founder of Ethereum & Parity. This is obviously a credible developer. It passes my first filter with flying colors. It also passes my second filter.
However, I don’t know if it passes my third filter. It is filled with technical features and functions, but little explanation of the benefits. It wants to connect (bridge) different blockchains, which will enable scaling, which is a good thing. However, to do so would be an incredibly difficult task and I question if Polkadot will be able to pull it off. Hopefully, they’ll prove me wrong.
There is another project that is trying to connect different blockchains together, as well, but I forget the name.
If Polkadot wanted people, other than blockchain developers to understand their project, they should’ve done a better job of explaining the problem(s) that they are trying to solve and the benefits of solving those problems to non-technical people. But, do they need to? I don’t see any info about ICO or token sale. Maybe they have enough money from their ETH holdings that they don’t need funding.
One interesting excerpt from the white paper is this:
Quote
Is Polkadot designed to replace (insert crypto-currency here): No. Polkadot tokens are neither intended nor designed to be used as a currency. They would make a bad currency: most will remain illiquid in the staking system and those that are liquid will face substantial fees for transfer of ownership. Rather, the purpose of Polkadot tokens is to be a direct representation of stake in the Polkadot network.
I’m not quite sure how the Polkadot tokens will go up in value. For any token or coin to go up in value, the usage or demand must go up. Bitcoin is going up because people are throwing money into it to store value. Ethereum is going up because people are throwing money into it, in order to buy tokens at ICOs. What will be the fuel for Polkadot?
If it is indeed Gavin Wood running this project, then it is obviously not a scam or crap. It’s just hard to quantify the benefits of holding Polkadot tokens.
Though, there is one minor stain on Gavin. Someone hacked $32 million from Parity. Who hacked it? Was it an inside job?
Why should the DOTS have a value in the future? Because they are needed and they are scarce.
