There are many "De-Fi" (Decentralized Finance) apps out there in the crypto/Blockchain space, each with their unique features and offerings. The most popular one is Compound.Finance which provides loans and also lets lenders earn from attractive interest rates. So far, "De-Fi" apps have been widely successful providing "Banking to the Unbanked". With stablecoins mimicking traditional Fiat currencies, people can enjoy banking in a completely decentralized manner. The emergence of COVID-19 in the mainstream world, has accelerated adoption of "De-Fi" apps and stablecoins by a large rate.

If "De-Fi" apps become extremely popular and work as intended, do you think the industry will replace traditional banking in the future? Or does it have a long way to go?

Your input will be greatly appreciated. Thanks in advance.

Ethereum is becoming extremely popular nowadays with the rise of "De-Fi" apps and stablecoins. Most people are just into it in order to make a lot of money in the shortest time possible. Since they're newcomers into crypto, they can easily make mistakes when sending coins from one address to another. Now, imagine if you check your wallet and it has 1 ETH sent to you by a mysterious address. At current rates, that would be an average of $400 (USD) in your pocket.

What will you do if someone accidentally or mistakenly sent you 1 ETH? Will you donate it to a charity? Will you send it back to its original owner? If it were me, I'd return it back to its original owner as long as he/she is able to provide a signed message with the address' private key proving the coin's ownership. But since crypto is widely unregulated, anyone can do as they please.

Thoughts?

Bitcoin has been around for 11 years now, with a large ecosystem of exchanges, wallet providers, and apps behind it. There are now many governments recognizing it as legitimate, bringing a large number of investors into it. For just a short amount of time since its inception, I'd say that Bitcoin has achieved extraordinary results. While all of this sounds good, most people still seem to believe that Bitcoin is a scam or not worth their time. For instance, Warren Buffet criticizes Bitcoin telling that it'll become "worthless" over time. It's these negative comments, which make people skeptical about using Bitcoin and cryptocurrencies as serious money for day-to-day payments.

No matter how crypto enthusiasts try to convince people to believe that Bitcoin is legitimate, everything seems to be the same. I'm starting to wonder why most people have this kind of mentality towards Bitcoin? After all, the pioneer cryptocurrency is being traded at legitimate exchanges. Even some governments have been collecting taxes from Bitcoin. But that hasn't changed people's minds about it. What are your thoughts?

I've been enjoying cryptocurrencies with zero transaction fees like Nano and EOS, as they prove to be economically feasible for cross-border payments. While their level of adoption is not as comparable as Bitcoin or Ethereum, they're still a great option for digital payments. Zero fees and near-instant transaction confirmation times, seem to be the way of the future. Or is it? I mean, what's the catch with cryptocurrencies that don't charge fees to their users? Will they be able to survive for a very long time? Or will they turn into an idea that will fade into oblivion?

Whatever the case may be, cryptocurrencies with zero fees could eventually replace DASH or Bitcoin Cash's place as "digital cash". This greatly contributes towards the adoption of crypto and Blockchain technology in general. The only limitation would be price volatility. But imagine a stablecoin built on a Blockchain network with zero fees. It will be completely revolutionary, in my own opinion. Thoughts

There has been a lot of scams within the crypto space over the course of its lifetime. Most recently, a Twitter hack that took the accounts of prominent figures within the mainstream world, has been all over the news. Mainstream media has been making people believe that Bitcoin is "bad" by tying it to the Twitter hack. While malicious actors demanded to be paid in Bitcoin, it doesn't mean that the cryptocurrency itself is a scam. Unfortunately, many people in the mainstream world have commented about Bitcoin negatively because of the recent hack. Despite these unfortunate series of events, Bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies are experiencing huge gains on the market.

Do you think that scams harm Bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies' reputation in the mainstream world? What will it take for people to distance scams from Bitcoin itself? Thoughts?

For long, Bitcoin has been touted as the "store of value" of the crypto/Blockchain space with its limited supply of 21 million coins. Based on estimates, all Bitcoin will be mined by 2100. Now, what if developers decide to increase that hard cap in supply? If at that point in time, Bitcoin's prices stay just the way they are right now (less than $1m), it may become unprofitable for miners to continue supporting the Blockchain. With no block reward, they'll be living off fees. If prices are too low, earned fees won't be able to sustain miner's operations. By then, developers would need to raise the limit of 21 million coins to a higher value, re-introducing a block reward in order to attract miners into the Blockchain. Otherwise, the security of the Bitcoin blockchain will be at risk.

Do you think that the need to increase BTC's max supply will arise in the future? Or will Bitcoin be able to "live" just fine with a max supply of 21 million coins? Your input will be greatly appreciated.

Some time ago, EOS' block producers managed to "freeze" accounts on the Blockchain. Back in the day, the "Ethereum contender" was just starting to blossom. Still, it raised some concerns on the level of decentralization of EOS' consensus algorithm known as DPoS. This algorithm is much more efficient than traditional PoS or PoW in the sense that it's highly scalable requiring minimal energy footprint. For long, Blockchain networks such as Bitshares, STEEM, TRON, Lisk, Ark, and EOS have been using DPoS in order to provide users with a democratic network that focuses on energy efficiency and high transaction capacity. But EOS' case, shows us that there's a lot of work to be done with DPoS. Something similar happened to STEEM a while ago, where Justin Sun's controlled witnesses confiscated funds on the Blockchain. That makes 2 cases where it has been proven that DPoS is utterly centralized.

Do you think that DPoS is flawed? Can it be improved? Does DPoS have a future? Or will it eventually be replaced by traditional PoS or BFT algorithms? Your input will be greatly appreciated. Thanks in advance

I know that there's something called "Proof of Existence" where I can simply verify the ownership of documents and other important stuff using the Blockchain itself. At least, this works with digital data where I can obtain a unique hash from it and verify its authenticity on the Blockchain. But what if I want to prove I'm the sole owner of a tangible (physical) item? How can I exactly achieve this? There's no unique identifier (like a UPC barcode) that I can use to timestamp it on the Blockchain in order for me to prove that I'm the owner of a tangible item. I've seen many items of the same kind with the same barcode on a retail store. This way, it'll be difficult for me to prove authenticity on the Blockchain (no uniqueness).

If you happen to know of a way to prove the ownership of tangible (physical) items on the Blockchain, please let me know. I want to do this on both BTC and ETH blockchains, although it's often best to do this with BTC due to its immutable properties. Any suggestions or recommendations will be greatly appreciated. Thanks in advance.

In these times of turmoil, Gold is reaching new ATHs in price. But Bitcoin doesn't leave behind, as it quickly recovered to its "pre-COVID" prices on the market. It's today where Bitcoin prices are relatively stable. With a limited supply of only 21 million coins, hardened security, and a focus on decentralization, Bitcoin is often viewed by many as the successor of Gold. One of Bitcoin's greatest benefits on top of Gold, is portability. You can virtually carry your Bitcoin with you safely when travelling, without anyone noticing. That's not the case with Gold, as you'd need to carry physical bullion with you. Other than portability, Gold and Bitcoin are very much alike.

Do you think that Bitcoin will be able to replace Gold someday? As we shift into the "intangible" world, people will "ditch" physical stuff in exchange for digital items. Bitcoin can become the new digital Gold which serves as a safe-haven asset (store of value) in times of need. COVID-19 will greatly encourage people to adopt Bitcoin over Gold as their next store of value of choice. Thoughts?

When a miner gets paid his/her share of the BTC block reward, coins are often freshly-minted on the Blockchain (virgin). I've done some "digging" on Bitcoin public blockchain ledger via a block explorer, and it seems that newly-minted coins don't leave much of a trace on the Blockchain other than being linked to a single address. If miners are smart, they could choose to mine new Bitcoin on different addresses to prevent traceability. Maybe I'm wrong and newly-generated coins (Coinbase) are traceable just like any ordinary transaction on the BTC blockchain? I mean, what's the difference between freshly-mined coins and those sent by a person on the blockchain privacy-wise?

If the origin of newly-minted coins cannot be properly traced, then this could open a whole new world of possibilities. It might be able to achieve privacy on Bitcoin by mining new coins, and saving them on separate public addresses on the Blockchain. Anyone who doesn't want to go through a centralized exchange to acquire BTC, can simply mine the coin himself avoiding KYC/AML altogether. Thoughts?

I've seen that now USDT has reached a market cap of over $10 billion dollars (USD). The sudden rise could've been a result of the massive hype surrounding "De-Fi" and stablecoins. With Tether issuing new units (supply) of USDT, it makes me wonder whenever its "triumph" will last for long? After all, crypto land behaves in strange and bizarre ways. Imagine if USDT flips Ethereum on the market. All the eyes will be on Tether instead of Ethereum, as people are usually "following the money". I think Tether will continue to issue new coins on the Blockchain in order to maintain a high market cap ranking. Only then, USDT will stand alongside Bitcoin as the world's second-largest cryptocurrency (stablecoin) by market cap.

What do you think will happen if USDT flips ETH on the market? Will everything remain the same? Or will ETH lose attention from the mainstream world? Will USDT be able to maintain such high market cap for a long time? Your input will be greatly appreciated.

According to a news article from decrypt, the United States Internal Revenue Service (IRS) wants to have the ability to track & trace privacy-oriented cryptocurrencies like Monero and Zcash, as well as, Bitcoin's Lightning Network. Chainalysis is a well-known blockchain data collection company, which could give more power to the IRS with its surveillance tools. Imagine if they develop something to track and trace privacy coins and BTC's LN. It would greatly defeat crypto's anonymity and the ability to remove the middleman from the system. While I have nothing against paying taxes to the government, the fact that they can trace my transactions just as they would with banks accounts, greatly defeats crypto's purpose of separating "The State" from "Money".

What do you think the outcome of privacy coin and LN surveillance will be? Will the IRS be successful at spying on people's transactions in the future? Do you think other countries' tax agencies will do start doing the same? Your input will be greatly appreciated. Thanks in advance.

There has been some "buzz" going around related to "De-Fi" thanks to the negative effects of COVID-19 in the mainstream economy. There are many projects out there which claim to be "decentralized" these days. But deep inside, they're just a "reincarnation" of banks right on the Blockchain subject to single points of failure. For instance, Binance claims that its "Binance Chain" platform is "decentralized" when you and I know that's not the case. The same thing happens with IOTA (centralized coordinator) and Ripple's "XRP Ledger".

If we base ourselves on facts instead of projects' claims, we'll realize that a very small portion of cryptocurrencies provide true decentralization and censorship resistance. But most people don't care about decentralization as long as they're able to make money in crypto land. It's best we call projects such as XRP, TRON, and IOTA as "distributed ledgers" rather than "decentralized Blockchains" due to the way they're designed. As long as the term "decentralized" is just inappropriately, people will believe that their funds are "SAFU" in any type of cryptocurrency or Blockchain network.

Do you think mainstream crypto companies, and startups are making bad use of the term "decentralized"? Are people worldwide being fooled by these same entities? Your input will be greatly appreciated.

I've stumbled across many decentralized cloud storage platforms like Storj, Sia, Swarm (ETH blockchain), and IPFS. They seem to serve their purpose well, providing an "alternative" to existing cloud storage services which are utterly centralized. Technically speaking, everything is "reds and roses". But as far as mainstream adoption goes, decentralized cloud storage solutions are "left behind in the dust". Since you'd need to use a token or cryptocurrency for most decentralized cloud storage platforms, you're exposed to volatility risks. It's not the same paying for cloud storage with a volatile cryptocurrency than with Fiat. Maybe stablecoins will prove to be useful for both the "renter" and the "user"?

Of course, storage platforms like Sia and Storj are often much cheaper than their centralized counterparts. But for some reason, people seem to trust services like Dropbox, AWS, and Google Drive more than these projects. I'm starting to wonder if decentralized cloud storage will prove to be successful in the long run, or simply an idea that will fade into oblivion.

Do you think decentralized cloud storage platforms are worth it? Will centralized cloud storage services continue to reign supreme in the digital world? If not, why? Your input will be greatly appreciated. Thanks in advance

In Bitcoin, there is a working version of a Layer-Two solution for scalability named "The Lightning Network". As far as Ethereum goes, we have the Raiden Network but it's not being actively used (or developed) right now. There was something called the "Plasma Framework", but I haven't heard much from it lately. Maybe it was abandoned for something better? Since the Raiden Network and Plasma Framework are no longer being worked on (or at least not being used in the mainstream world), I'm starting to wonder if there are other, better Layer-Two solutions out there that can be used right now to scale Ethereum (ETH)?

If you happen to know of other good projects which serve as a Layer-Two solution for scalability on the ETH blockchain, please let me know. It's nice to have an actively-developed version of the Lightning Network right on the ETH blockchain for added convenience. Waiting for ETH 2.0 to become a reality will no longer be required if there are working L2 solutions that can scale ETH efficiently. I believe that ERC-20 tokens will benefit the most from this.

Any suggestions or recommendations will be greatly appreciated. Thanks in advance.

As of today, Tether's USDT stablecoin is the world's third-largest cryptocurrency by market cap. It experienced an unprecedented rise since the COVID-19 outbreak took the world by storm. Some say that USDT is being massively pumped on the market by the Tether company itself. With shady operations such as lack of transparency, I wouldn't be surprised if USDT goes down the drain sometime in the future.

The real issue is not USDT itself, but rather its impact on the crypto market in the long term. For now, USDT has a positive impact over the crypto market due to the extreme hype surrounding stablecoins and "De-Fi". But if USDT is being artificially pumped, the effects won't last for long. Imagine if USDT goes all the way to $0 in the future due to a large government crackdown. It would turn out to be completely disastrous for the entire crypto market, since it's directly linked to stablecoins. At least, the downfall in crypto's prices will be in the short term. With USDT censoring people from getting access to their funds, anything could happen in the future.

What impact will USDT have in the crypto market over the long term? Will it be a positive or negative one? What if governments find out that Tether is a scam? Being the world's third-largest cryptocurrency in market cap, a full government crackdown will turn out to be a huge blow to the entire crypto/Blockchain space. Thoughts?

There has been a lot of hype surrounding "De-Fi" and Ethereum over the past months. It seems that COVID-19 has made crypto and Blockchain technology more popular than ever. A token that has seen the most increase in market cap and price on the crypto market is Chainlink (LINK). It's odd to see such a "pump" in price for such a token, after being under the radar some years ago. If the project is delivering as promised, then "LINK" could retain its value on the market for the foreseeable future. Otherwise, expect a massive downfall in its price due to lack of interest from traders, investors, and everyday people.

What's the big deal with Chainlink? Do you think it's one of the most hyped tokens on the crypto/Blockchain space right now? What's so special about it? Will it survive in the long run? Or is it just another nail in the coffin? Your input will be greatly appreciated. Thanks in advance.

Do you think it's possible to create a smart contract based mixer that would anonymize ETH and ERC-20 tokens? Considering that there have been talks about integrating zkSNARKs into Ethereum, I've been wondering if a decentralized mixer would be feasible on-chain. If made possible, it would completely revolutionize the crypto industry as we know it. We might have no need for separate privacy solutions, as smart contracts would make everything possible right from the Blockchain. This solution would be far more decentralized than centralized mixers hosted by a third party.

Will there ever be an on-chain mixer on ETH using the power of smart contracts? If there's one available, I'd appreciate if you could let me know. Your input will be greatly appreciated. Thanks in advance.

There are many smart contract platforms out there on the market each with their unique features and use cases for the mainstream world. There are many exciting gambling dApps out there on the Blockchain, that are too hard to ignore these days. Personally, I find myself to be quite fond of Ethereum with its ever-growing library of lotteries and decentralized online casinos. But I greatly dislike the high fees and slow transaction throughput on the ETH blockchain. I have tested both TRON and EOS, and they're far superior than ETH in this sense. While they're not as decentralized as ETH, they certainly provide convenience to everyday gamblers like you and me.

Among the various cryptocurrencies and smart contract platforms available on the market, there's a "taste" for every gambler in the industry. Bitcoin is the most widely accepted cryptocurrency for gambling, followed by Ethereum and its competitors. But I believe cryptocurrencies that are fast and cheaper to use, will gain a huge advantage over others in the decentralized gambling industry.

What's your favorite crypto for gambling? Why did you choose it? Do you think the decentralized gambling industry will grow now that crypto is becoming more popular due to COVID-19? Or is it still too early to tell?

Ever since COVID-19 took the world by storm, people have been resorting to the world of "Decentralized Finance" (De-Fi). Ethereum-based smart contracts provide many services known in the traditional banking industry such as lending and borrowing. There's been a boom in "De-Fi" tokens over the past months as the mainstream economy loses traction.

If the current monetary system collapses in its entirety, people will dive in the decentralized economy like never before. It seems that COVID-19 is accelerating adoption of decentralized cryptocurrencies as we speak. The longer the outbreak takes to disappear, the better it'll be for the growth of "Decentralized Finance". I've seen many people talking about ETH's several "De-Fi" platforms, bringing some hype to the industry. Compound tokens (COMP), and even DAI have increased in popularity in such a short amount of time.

Do you think that COVID-19 will become extremely beneficial to the decentralized economy in the long term? Is "De-Fi" way overhyped these days? What will happen with crypto once COVID-19 comes to an end? Your input will be greatly appreciated.