-
Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
-
We have made minor adjustments to how the search bar works on ResetEra. You can read about the changes here.
Kickstarter Will Move Its Crowdfunding Platform to Blockchain
- Thread starter Shard Shinjuku
- Start date
- News
i feel like these threads are perfect microcosms of the dunning kruger effect. On one hand you clearly have the old head engineers going why tf are we reinventing databases again and on the other kool aid bros going nah everyone on era is weird about crypto cos they don't understand it (proceeds to drop the evergreen classic "do your research" around anytime they're challenged with meaningful questions ).
here's the thing, everytime I see someone mention a use case that's functional, it's always followed by some kinda wishful thinking said platform will go to the moon so the spruiker can finally see some of those fomo gains they've been hearing about.
i just wish folk would be more honest about the fact they enjoy their always online speculative money mmo and not try to constantly spin it as some kind of world saving tech. Capital is still capital whether it's own by a corp or a whale and power still ends up centralised accordingly.
here's the thing, everytime I see someone mention a use case that's functional, it's always followed by some kinda wishful thinking said platform will go to the moon so the spruiker can finally see some of those fomo gains they've been hearing about.
i just wish folk would be more honest about the fact they enjoy their always online speculative money mmo and not try to constantly spin it as some kind of world saving tech. Capital is still capital whether it's own by a corp or a whale and power still ends up centralised accordingly.
It's new tech, so I'm not surprised nobody understands blockchain. I sure don't.
There are companies who are implementing it though, so if that's what they chose to do then they have their reasons. If a healthcare or supply chain company wants to use blockchain for their database management, they can do what they think is best for their company. We don't need to understand blockchain, but they understand blockchain, that's why they're using it. I don't think they are doing this to use a buzzword to attract and scam customers, they're using blockchain because it's a more efficient method than what they've been doing in the past. It's not a selling point. They're just using it.
Step 1: Launch massive centralized coin with a lot of hype
Step 2: Get everyone to buy in to drive the price up
Step 3: Profit
I feel like they're doing this simply to cut into a profit they're losing to DAOs. Don't get me wrong, I have some crypto-holdings but at least I'm honest enough to just say I want them to hit a certain price so I don't have to work anymore. Kickstarter probably isn't doing this for any technological benefit; it's a money-grab.
Step 2: Get everyone to buy in to drive the price up
Step 3: Profit
I feel like they're doing this simply to cut into a profit they're losing to DAOs. Don't get me wrong, I have some crypto-holdings but at least I'm honest enough to just say I want them to hit a certain price so I don't have to work anymore. Kickstarter probably isn't doing this for any technological benefit; it's a money-grab.
Most crypto transactions are prohibitively expensive. They only really work with really large transactions.
I can't help but feel this is so they can also some end up in Web3 / Metaverse and allow people to sell goods direct in there. The Web3 world is some serious gold rush shit of re-inventing the wheel
.
I'm very glad you used ConstitutionDAO as an example, because now for everybody's viewing pleasure:
‘Buy the Constitution’ Aftermath: Everyone Very Mad, Confused, Losing Lots of Money, Fighting, Crying, Etc.
ConstitutionDAO tried to buy the Constitution. Now it has a $40 million mess on its hands and entire refunds are being wiped out by high fees.www.vice.com
The future of self organizing everyone. :v
lol wow
TIL
That really depends on multiple factors, such as what blockchain and how congested said blockchain is at the time of the transaction. Some Blockchains have very small transaction fees. It's just that ETH and BTC are where the majority of transactions take place and they have large fees (specifically ETH).
But yes, whatever Kickstarter uses will in all likelyhood be more expensive than a regular transaction.
More potential funding avenues. It makes complete sense on the side of the creators and kickstarter as a business. I still hate it because crypto really just sucks and really is ineffective at most of the things it tries to do and creates tons of new problems.
I think far too many are focusing too much on coins/crypto when they see 'blockchain'. You don't move your platform over to the blockchain just for some coins. With how much fervor Web3 has right now they're probably looking into building their own nodes.
What this solves? No clue really. The Web3 hype/discourse is really insufferable right now. Smart Contracts to hold goods or for acquiring goods in "the metaverse" makes sense. But again, it's more making a bet on tech will be in 3/5/10 years
What this solves? No clue really. The Web3 hype/discourse is really insufferable right now. Smart Contracts to hold goods or for acquiring goods in "the metaverse" makes sense. But again, it's more making a bet on tech will be in 3/5/10 years
Honestly I'm a techy person but I really don't get the technicals here. I only know that the blockchain allows for very reliable signatures for any kind of data. At least I think that's the case.
Honestly I should be learning this stuff just to keep myself up to date but it's just so full of biztech weirdness around it...
Honestly I should be learning this stuff just to keep myself up to date but it's just so full of biztech weirdness around it...
Its not biztech weirdness around it, its biztech weirdness at its core. There's a reason why like every application is actually fintech if you peel back the top layer, the whole thing is about finding more ways to financialize online interactions
It's essentially techno libertarian trying to re-create the first WWW experience, with VC's frothing at the potential gains from being in on the ground floor.
I feel like there is small trickets of value in some of this all but it's sadly overrun by some of the worst technobros
I would love for literally anyone to explain what a website "being on blockchain" even means (not explained in the article or by anyone in the thread) or what that would actually accomplish, for Kickstarter or its users over what standard tech already does.
I don't have a hot take either way because there's literally no explanation or even seemingly idea of what this is. Kickstarter hasn't even started developing it yet it seems lolol
Guess I'm not backing that panda gamecube controller after all. oh well, money saved I suppose.
Honest question, if you've used and enjoyed the site so much, why does this move sink it for you? Seems to me like it's a lot of tech doublespeak and is just a (unnecessary and probably overly convoluted) business thing and it wouldn't affect how or why I pay to support a game, album, etc. that I want to get made. I guess I don't understand enough about the potential nefariousness of this stuff outside of how it all seems like a shell game to make rich people richer. Maybe I answered my own question.
i legitimately don't understand this take. like i legitimately don't. even if it becomes common place, it doesn't change the criticism of the technology? it's still going to have a very bad environmental impact and still have all the inherent issues that makes it so attractive to alt-right types. even if this becomes as common place as cars, which it probably won't, what are we doing this all for? for our transactions to become publicly available off a gas-guzzling super machine? no thanks. coins that have value that fluctuates even worse than the stock market? no thanks.
there's nothing positive to gleam from web3's ideas, which that's kind of basically all it is? the only things that resemble the ideas of web3 are rife with thievery, scamming, and overall just really unpleasant mutations of ideas in capitalism i have no want or need to engage with. the idea EVERYONE will be casually doing this is really silly given nobody seems to understand what the hell this is.
At this point its largely about sending a message that I do not want the future of the internet to be increasingly built on blockchain technology. I have a lot of objections to it that run the gamut from practical problems with security and liability to ideological issues with the way that all blockchain ever seems to incentivize is financialization and speculation (without even touching on the energy issue). Its about boycotting where I can to try and slow the rising tide.
I think the issue, at least as it relates to Kickstarter, is there is no clear answer other than some form of clear ownership / voting capacity that has a "contract" for now but we honestly don't know in the long term. Most of the "Web3" stuff right now is just basically NFT's (think Second Life but with exclusivity, or game skins/armor with an ability to resell them). But if we're to make a historical analogy it's kind of like "the cloud" when it was hard to understand why or long term value, but "the cloud" now is hella advanced. So imagine if Microsoft never shifted to cloud tech until 2019, they'd be left in the dust. This is basically Kickstarter trying to be out ahead and explore and find bits of viability to it all.
So why the PR then? VC money most likely. VC's are frothing at the mouth over this shit right now.
I did my final year capstone project on Blockchain, wrote like a 10k word paper, made my own mini-blockchain in Java, and I honest to God still don't know what it is.
Blockchain tech is far more than payments, you don't shit your entire platform to it for _just_ payments.
But in an industry like pharma, what benefit does the counterfeiting codes repository being decentralized have? It's not like drug production is done by thousands of mom and pop shops that could benefit from being verified on a blockchain for end users. Seems like a database would be plenty scalable to the amount of inputs actually needed from the manufacturers.
if you guys started thinking about blockchain as cloud computing ..you'd probably have a better time grappling with it.
Except its not. If it was cloud computing, the solutions it provides could be met by...cloud computing solutions. Its a public ledger with distributed (not nessecarily decentralized) trust protocols for record addition and we have now had a decade to see what sort of systems that is capable of producing and it keeps producing the same thing.
oh my god, dont tell me this is serious.
why not just use cloud computing????
Because I believe a company should be a democracatic organization rather than a dictatorship getting all the benefits while workers just get what they dictate.
And crypto is the way to that future through DAO's
Please read a single work of leftist literature from the past...one hundred and fifty years
DAOs grant power based on stake, which replicates current structures of power.
no it fucking isn't?
everyone seems to be ignoring that these efforts are still spearheaded... by companies... and owned by such... like huh, that seems to go against the whole point, weird!
but under a DAO the one with the most money controlls the most votes
and unless you're using your own nodes you're in someone elses control
Is this worth the headache of needing to make sure that blockchains are adopted?
With how much controversy there is about the technology, I can't see this taking off.
I would like to have democratic service be hosted on ::checks notes:: Jack Dorsey's Square plz
alternatively just tell everyone that it'll be commonplace in the future and they're just being abe simpson yelling at clouds and the tide is coming whether they like it or not!
Amazing how the counter-point to 'here's a spectacular failure of this business model' is 'well they just weren't doing it right, it'll get fixed by someone eventually, probably' and yet here we are a decade+ into blockchain tech and it hasn't matured past speculative investment bubble. This is the future capitalism wants. Trust in the process, pay no attention to the men behind the curtains.
Do tell how you think DAOs/blockchains will help with that democratic approach. Blockchains are not impenetrable and can be altered, you think companies won't weaponize that to their advantage?
What you're espousing, is a libertarian wet dream with no basis in reality. Just like clowns here talk about crypto supposedly ushering in a new era of decentralizing and no more poverty, and yet, people are using crypto to line their fat pockets.
lol way beyond gas guzzling super machines that is 2009 tech. 2021 blockchain tech uses less energy than Visa
And.. that's why all these large corporations are pushing crypto?
What on earth..
This doesn't seem correct, do you have a source on this?
actually there are DAO's now on the blockchain. Token holders are able to make proposals and the community votes based on their token holdings. Many layer-1s have already incorporated this idea.
before with ETH and BTC it was strictly down to the miners to vote on which direction to take the code.
Now with POS it's moved to now coin holders can take part.
About that whole "democratic" and "decentralized" thing:
www.vice.com
Amazon’s Server Outage Took Down a ‘Decentralized’ Crypto Exchange
How decentralized is decentralized finance?
www.vice.com