interesting article: Pay-to-use blockchains will never achieve mass adoption

[larry_vw_1955]

I've had this thought before. It's sad that none of blockchains in existence are free, you have to get their native blockchain currency to even use the platform.

use the platform for what? to hope the native blockchain currency goes up in value? what else is it good for? 

If you already have funds in crypto, it's relatively smooth state of affairs but for those who don't — they have to get funds via on-ramp platforms and they require kyc, some people don't prefer to do kyc and would rather give up onboarding altogether.

kyc is not even the worst of it. you have to worry about them "closing" your account and maybe freezing your funds. and it's not like the local bank where you can just sit down and talk to someone face to face.

There is another, if fiat to crypto is banned by the country, then you either use p2p platforms or give up. Do you realize how much of hassle this is just to use the blockchain? Most people don't realize how big of restriction this is because they already have funds in crypto.

yeah i mean bitcoin seems like it is losing ground to things like fednow: who wants to go through all the above hassles when it's not necessary?

FedNow’s legal terms contain a game changer for digital wallets and payment apps
https://techcrunch.com/2023/09/26/fednows-legal-terms-contain-a-game-changer-for-digital-wallets-and-payment-apps/

[libert19]

I've had this thought before. It's sad that none of blockchains in existence are free, you have to get their native blockchain currency to even use the platform.

use the platform for what? to hope the native blockchain currency goes up in value? what else is it good for? 

For Bitcoin, that may be true. But on blockchains you can make dapps on, there are more uses, examples being: Ethereum, Solana, Cosmos, Hive, etc.

You will require native token to use dapps (this term includes plenty: dexes, p2e games, nft marketplaces, etc), On chains like Ethereum (this includes most EVM chains — Arbitrum, Optimism, Base, etc) you must need base crypto (ETH) to make token transfer. Without having native currency, you are stuck, despite the fact that you may be having significant value in token but without having native token, you won't be able to exchange it or make a transfer. 

[larry_vw_1955]

For Bitcoin, that may be true. But on blockchains you can make dapps on, there are more uses, examples being: Ethereum, Solana, Cosmos, Hive, etc.

You will require native token to use dapps (this term includes plenty: dexes, p2e games, nft marketplaces, etc), On chains like Ethereum (this includes most EVM chains — Arbitrum, Optimism, Base, etc) you must need base crypto (ETH) to make token transfer. Without having native currency, you are stuck, despite the fact that you may be having significant value in token but without having native token, you won't be able to exchange it or make a transfer. 

so it's like being strong armed into buying the native base crypto just to do anything with your tokens. another reason i'm not a big fan of ethereum "tokens" 

[bluebit25]

I don't follow it all, but just observing a little bit of the content can feel that readers will easily misunderstand news like this. Such a comparison is really unfair, when it is impossible to say the advantages of one side compared to the disadvantages. People look to bitcoin for many different things, and of course many factors present the opportunity to earn as a default over time as it becomes more involved in the investment field.

Even some of the recent projects I've read about, they're priced at numbers that I would consider unicorns in the tech space, actually many are actually quite absurd in their infancy, but still is the acceptance of everything in this market.

[wozzek23]

Could this happen? I mean blockchain could definitely used for many stuff, but as a data to sell for ads? I am not entirely sure. It is definitely a big data network there is no arguments there, and that data could worth something if it can be used, but how could it be used? That is a difficult thing to handle. I mean if we could have some new sort of blockchain where you could see ads for transactions instead of fee's, then it could maybe work, but that doesn't really sound like a normal thing, or at least something we haven't seen yet.

I mean people could rather pay for the fee, or just watch a 30 seconds video for example, or they  could see 5 ads for 10 seconds each or something, and do it for free, would that even work?

[hatshepsut93]

Blockchain projects should learn from Google and Facebook by monetizing their users without directly asking for their money.[/i]

Apples should learn from oranges lmao

There's a good reason why Bitcoin is pay to use and can't offer free transactions. There's a good reason why every single "free transactions" blockchain project has failed. It's all because of the basic properties of blockchain - if you want decentralization there will be harsh tradeoffs.

[panganib999]

Do we have pay-to-use blockchains now? I don’t think so, if what you consider as “pay-to-use” are networks that charge their users with transactions fees every-time they make a transaction (which are all of them by the way)then we’re going to have an issue indeed lol. But I don’t think the reason why bitcoin couldn’t be adopted on whether it is free to use or not, it’s all because of the lack of information and prejudice against it which will proliferate amongst those who do not know better, and just like germ theory they’d contract that skewed ideology to other no-knowers until the whole world either knows about bitcoin, or doesn’t and actively hates on it.

[larry_vw_1955]

There's a good reason why Bitcoin is pay to use and can't offer free transactions. There's a good reason why every single "free transactions" blockchain project has failed. It's all because of the basic properties of blockchain - if you want decentralization there will be harsh tradeoffs.

you make it sound like there could never be a successful blockchain with free transactions. then what's the point of trying to make the lightning network isn't that kind of like admitting that having to pay a fee is not good enough? and it needs to be cheaper? what other reason could there be.

but even lightning is not free. plus not to get too far off topic but i think after seeing some updates on it every now and then, lightning network has to be the most complicated project i have ever seen even more complicated than bitcoin itself which kind of questions the very point of its existence.