Maybe this has been brought up a million times, but looking at the current goals of a lot of financial apps. Do you think eventually it will just be something like BCC, LTC, NANO that is most highly adopted and just runs the others away?
Or, will it come to atomic swaps, where we have steadier market prices, and you can just pay with 6 different currencies to be converted over for payment?

On February 15, 2018, several projects in the Ethereum space announced their combined effort to establish the Ethereum Community Fund (ECF), meant to hasten the development of blockchain infrastructure and Dapps.

Cosmos, OmiseGO, Golem, Maker, Global Brain Blockchain Labs, and Raiden embarked on this endeavor with the mission of producing "an environment where teams and ideas can thrive, grow, and collaborate to become essential and functioning pieces of the broader Ethereum ecosystem." It is anticipated that members of the ECF that are already well established will act as pillars for emerging projects by "building out base infrastructure and supporting a more robust ecosystem of emerging projects."

Ethereum founder Vitalik Buterin said that the ECF will accelerate the development of structure that Ethereum needs in order to thrive. "Ethereum has grown beyond my expectations over the last few years, but the work is clearly not finished. Delivering value that matches the hype should be the mantra of 2018; efforts such as the ECF which help organize the development of the ecosystem are going to help to make that possible."

The collective projects believe that the best way to achieve this goal is by creating the "Infrastructure Grant program," which would financially support individuals and organizations, enabling them to build "crucial open-source infrastructure, tooling, and applications."

The Ethereum community has prided itself on being a do-ocracy, in which members are encouraged to take on roles and tasks the best suit their abilities. "This technology has incredible promise, but only by laying a strong foundation can we hope to see this technology reach its full potential and gain mainstream adoption," said CEO of OmiseGO, Jun Hasegawa. "This begins with investment now in public infrastructure that is scalable, versatile, and decentralized."

When ethereum was born it was truly an innovative project. However as time goes on governance and politics are starting to become more prevalent. Let’s look more in detail at the main issues that ethereum experienced during its history.
The DAO hack: a smart contract that was supposed to work like some sort of investment fund got hacked. For multiple reasons the foundation quickly decided that it was important to go through a contentious hard fork and override the code of the smart contract thus sacrificing the mantra of “code is law” which since that day has never been heard again.
There are many reasons why it was decided to give up immutability of the blockchain. It is rumored that most of the foundation members had invested themselves in the DAO, clearly giving them a strong incentive not to lose their money. Also the fact that a single entity (hacker) could have so much ETH could be a risk if one day the system would migrate to PoS. However this operation was very controversial especially because usually in the blockchain world there is a strong belief that everyone should take responsibility for their actions. What if tomorrow another DAO is created, it raises a lot of ETH, contains a bug and so could endanger the transition to PoS once more? Will another hard fork be performed? Another option could have been to simply freeze the money in the DAO contract forever so that the eventual transition to PoS would not have been endangered but also punishing the people that decided to invest in a highly speculative and untested contract without proper research to ensure that those people cannot repeat the same mistake with another potential DAO and put once more the network at risk.
On the other hand more recently there have been other issues with ethereum, mostly related to the multisig wallet from Parity. Parity is not just some company producing applications for ethereum, it is the creator and maintainer of the Parity node which basically runs around 50% of the network. The official multisig contract of one of the official ethereum full nodes had a major bug which resulted in the money being frozen.
Let’s look at this more in detail. You have a user using the official implementation of ethereum, that user wants to keep his money as safe as possible so he decides to use the multisig option which is recommended in order to keep the ETH as safe as possible. Turn out that the official implementation has a bug which basically freezes the money in the contract.
The current solution from ethereum seems to be to just do nothing. Just let that money remain frozen.
It seems very weird to me that basically when the foundation members plus a bunch of speculators invested into a highly risky and speculative contract the foundation felt the need to return their money in full. On the other hand when people wanted to keep their money as secure as possible following the guidelines of the official client implementation and it turns out that there is a bug in the official software the decision is to do nothing and keep the money frozen.
Besides the obvious ethical issue (rewarding the risk takers who lost and punishing the risk adverse that followed the official instructions) this also spells very bad for future corporate adoption of ethereum.
Ethereum currently has the advantage of being by far the main platform for smart contracts, but new competitors are coming and their refusal to evolve could be a big advantage to their competitors.
Zilliqa is a new ethereum competitor that will ensure this kind of problem will not happen anymore.
It is not clear exactly what interest the ethereum foundation is trying to protect with its strong commitment to non-action. It could be that since most of the money raised by a project called Polkadot which some people perceive as a potential competitor to ethereum was also into one of those multisig contracts which have been affected the choice may be that it’s worth sacrificing all those users that lost money because of the bug in order to be sure that one competitor is damaged.
It will be interesting to see which strategy will win in the future. Strategies of innovation like for example Zilliqa or more politically based strategies where a bigger project tries to destroy/sabotage other projects that could be perceived as threats.
It seems that after all blockchain governance may converge with corporate governance of traditional large corporations, at least in the case of ethereum.

I don't have the time or money to build the sites, they were going to be places for Dash or crypto users to see nearby stores and crypto atms on a map, if anyone is interested in buying post your offer below.

I just wanted to share this bit of information with you about TRON as a Chinese investor. Yes, there are existing applications that already do what TRON is setting out to do however when you review a product like TRON or NEO you have to think about the market that it is most likely to serve. The Chinese market will likely be its main focus (EXCLUDE ALL WESTERN INTERACTIONS FOR NOW)
To help you understand the value proposition of TRON better, you have to first think about facebook vs wechat google vs baidu didi vs uber NEO vs ETH
Traditionally western technology companies have always had a difficult time entering the Chinese market.
The Chinese government will likely support TRON over Steem (ETH) etc (Why do we think that NEO will succeed over ETH because NEO is a smart economy platform much like ETH. NEO would like to incorporate blockchain with infrastructure development. China is developing a lot of smart cities using blockchain and its hard to believe that they would support a foreign technology rather than there own. You can ask yourself the same question would the US government allow foreign companies to manage sensitive data related to there infrastructure developments? I highly doubt it)
For the basis of this comment, I just want to review TRON's entertainment value. Lets take a look at these 2 entertainment industries in China.
LIVE STREAMING (3 Billion USD market) a) Live Streaming in China is a huge market with an annual growth of more than 100% year to year b) Many of these platforms take enormous fees from content creators. TRON's whitepaper mentions that it would like to enter this market and offer an alternative to content creators. How it will do this is up for speculation but the market potential is definitely there.
Tencent's WECHAT (Value at over 500 Billion USD) a) Wechat is massive in China, everyone in China uses Wechat. b) How is TRON going to generate value from Wechat? Wechat has subscription accounts which authors can write posts/articles to there followers. (This imo will have a larger market and community than STEEM will ever hope to achieve) 同道大叔 is one of the listed partners of TRON. He is a Chinese influencer with a very successful business on wechat subscription accounts. If he decides to support TRON tokens as a form of reward from his fans, this will introduce TRON into China's mainstream market very rapidly.
I hope this gives you some insight about why there is so much Chinese investment into TRON atm. It just makes a lot of sense for us. Yes, I agree TRON dog is useless but its serves as a test bed for future development. I view the application as testing the water with something light and manageable.