![]() ![]() No fees - this is actually great long term (pretty much IOTA's "killer feature"), but it also means that a lot of people/companies will use the network completely without using the IOTA token.I'm not even talking about nonsense projects like Doge, but for example Cardano - it has 18x larger market cap and they don't have a working product yet as well. Price performance - So far, during this/recent bull market, the price movements of IOTA were usually rather disappointing comparing to many other projects.I still think IOTA will conquer the IoT market, but I thought that it will easily conquer the regular crypto market as well - now I'm not so sure. Also, there are multiple competing platforms, most of which scale well and have very low fees - the place is crowded, and IOTA's advantages that looked absolutely amazing 3-4 years ago, now look just very good. TBH, 3-4 years ago Ethereum looked like a competitor that IOTA will beat easily - today it is no longer the case. Ethereum already has a quite large ecosystem and with scaling solutions and/or Ethereum 2.0 they might be able to once and for all solve their scaling/high fees problems. Timing - IOTA is arriving kind of late to the party.They will try to mitigate those by adding L1 OP codes, but that can be added in the long todo list. That brings advantages, but also disadvantages compared to L1 SCs. ![]() Is feeless + data really the thing everyone was waiting for, or will IOTA end up in the long list of cryptos running on pure speculation? ![]() Even ignoring things like first-moves advantage, in general we got literally thousands of crypto tokens, and barely any adoption. It is all nice in the end, but being the "best crypto" doesn't guarantee you to get any adoption. Math is nice, but only if it is running securely on mainnet for at least a year, I would call it proven tech.Īdoption. Without direct income for validators, you cannot expect them to have high end nodes, which puts more limitations on things like database size, and means eg more stringent dust protection than others. Yes a seperate one, again :stuck_out_tongue. (Something in general true regarding spam)įeeless. If you need to pay for them, people will quickly stop doing that. Since IOTA is feeless, I can spam all day long double spends. Eg while IOTA should have speed advantages compared to blockchains, the FPC voting on double spends means that double spends take more processing power than valid transactions, contrary to blockchains. Which is obviously an advantage, but it also opens up the possibility of attacks which are otherwise not a big deal. Yes it is history, but it does make you wonder how anyone could have thought it was a good idea.įeeless. So as suzoh said: "hard to buy" should be top priority along with getting partners to adopt the techĬopying what I wrote a while ago in Discord, with one extra: Those two things will smooth a lot of the issues. IOTA still has a lot of work to do in front of it, yes I don't like the internal IF battles and issues, but I think that as ugly and messy as those are the first thing they need is a mass of people behind the project, both in terms of companies adopting the tech and investors investing in the coin. That being said, please realize that imperfect projects do succeed, in fact sometimes more than 'more perfect' projects: Look at Betamax, look at Apple (Windows and Android are more popular in their respective silo) Both companies have missed hundreds of deadlines over the years, they patch things up as they go along, just look at the UI of Windows as a prime example. One thing I like to compare it too - and yes I know it is not a fair comparison - is to companies like Microsoft and Google, in the 90s Microsoft was hated, their leadership despised! Google puts out products and projects and abandons them a year later leaving their customers high and dry. ![]() I think all of these concerns are valid - the IF, the deadlines, adoption. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |