You cant request/cancel it yourself, you would need to write the company a mail, they make a counter transaction back to you.
So planning to bet on a future funded by even more make believe monopoly money got it.
This.I am, according to most metrics, an intelligent person who is tech literate.
Wtf does this mean.
"E-Mail" :PAre we time traveling into the past while bringing cyberpunk technology with us? Soon we will have a new postal service of cyber knights riding electronic horses to deliver mail back and forth. It was inevitable.
what does this improve?The weird ass ResetERA reaction to this stuff continues. This isn't a big deal (though, big development) and is just an improvement/long term play to how their infrastructure functions.
Is there some disease affecting every business owner right now?
The gist so far is that its a gamble on people adopting Blockchain in a few years and being fine with using it.
This I suppose.Nobody wants to be the person/business who isn't in this space in the event it actually is truly legit.
I did like your fantasy. Its now my headcanon for crypto related customer service.Bah. I assumed you were being sarcastic and my mind went wild. Either way, I'm not getting further involved with crypto. I helped an upcoming crypto currency once with their customer service platform and I decided to just drop it after meeting some weird people.
Makes sense.
Smart contracts are literally Kickstarter's use case. You want to be able to put money into a hold and only release it when certain conditions are met -- and most importantly you can do this without a third party (aka Kickstarter the company) actually holding onto the funds while the transition is made.
It's probably pretty scary to their existing business model because the whole reason they get to charge the premium is because they handle the handover of cash.
Got it, that makes sense. Beyond my personal feelings about this stuff I genuinely couldn't think of a viable reason to do this. Thanks!The gist so far is that its a gamble on people adopting Blockchain in a few years and being fine with using it.
I agree though, that its not a useful or even remotely worthwhile gamble as there are no inherent benefits for their business processes from it, or PR, or actual relevant funding processes.
This I suppose.
Yes it's called over evaluation.Is there some disease affecting every business owner right now?
Thats not an answer.Long term play to improve their relevancy (and existence, to be honest) in a world where creative transactions are handled mostly in blockchain.
Idk what y'all want from me. It's really not that hard to go research this stuff. You can disagree that it will be successful, but the constant "omg this is stupid" comments in these types of threads comes across really silly.
You cant request/cancel it yourself, you would need to write the company a mail, they make a counter transaction back to you.
Long term play to improve their relevancy (and existence, to be honest) in a world where creative transactions are handled mostly in blockchain.
Idk what y'all want from me. It's really not that hard to go research this stuff. You can disagree that it will be successful, but the constant "omg this is stupid" comments in these types of threads comes across really silly.
There is a perception that crypto and blockchain is the new hotness and companies should jump onboard if they want to be part of the future. NFTs in particular are being seen as a way to get dumb money.I assume part of the logic behind it is that Crypto bros have shown themselves to be gullible idiots happy to throw money at pointless things as long as they're connected to the blockchain. So having easier ways to draw them in and spend their money makes sense.
Long term play to improve their relevancy (and existence, to be honest) in a world where creative transactions are handled mostly in blockchain.
Idk what y'all want from me. It's really not that hard to go research this stuff. You can disagree that it will be successful, but the constant "omg this is stupid" comments in these types of threads comes across really silly.
You cant request/cancel it yourself, you would need to write the company a mail, they make a counter transaction back to you.
It solves the problem of Kickstarter not being somehow related to crypto and blockchain stuff, and thus losing out on interest - and lots of money - from speculative investors.…Why?
Like, what improvement would this make? What problem does it solve?
Almost every problem encountered by blockchain is solved by relying on centralized authorities, defeating the main reason for blockchain's existence.If a centralized decision-maker needs to be able to reverse any transaction, this seems like a bad use case for decentralized payments.
I don't understand the benefit. Isn't crypto difficult to cash out? Isn't being able to easily access the money earned from a Kickstarter campaign extremely important? Seems like it would just create more hurdles and make Kickstarter a worse platform for crowdfunding.
This is just word salad.Long term play to improve their relevancy (and existence, to be honest) in a world where creative transactions are handled mostly in blockchain.
Can you back up how exactly this is a net improvement over their existing infrastructure? The use case of a blockchain is to log transactions across a distributed ledger, presumably because you want to avoid a single entity holding ownership over the record of transactions. What about Kickstarter's platform is going to be improved by shifting to that for their backend? The article doesn't mention if they're going to license or open source the tech to do this, and that final product translating into a true decentralized take on Kickstarter isn't guarenteed either, especially given the lead Kickstarter already has in the space. It makes some logical sense for someone to create tech like this, but it makes no sense for Kickstarter to do this since they begin a centralized company is antithetical to the main selling point of a blockchain platform.The weird ass ResetERA reaction to this stuff continues. This isn't a big deal (though, big development) and is just an improvement/long term play to how their infrastructure functions.
Ok, boomers, time to learn a new term:
A decentralized autonomous organization (DAO), sometimes called a decentralized autonomous corporation (DAC), is an organization represented by rules encoded as a computer program that is transparent, controlled by the organization members and not influenced by a central government. A DAO's financial transaction record and program rules are maintained on a blockchain. The precise legal status of this type of business organization is unclear.
Decentralized autonomous organization - Wikipedia
en.wikipedia.org
Kickstarter is probably seeing this is a threat. In the long run, that is.
The last bigger DAO that was in the news was this:
From a meme to $47 million: ConstitutionDAO, crypto, and the future of crowdfunding
ConstitutionDAO raised $47 million to try to govern a copy of the US Constitution on the blockchain.www.theverge.com
I am getting around to understandin the idea of it. I still dont see a benefit for their platform or the users, but it would make them seem more investment friendly or for future blockchain tech startup projects. If they consider those startups to rake in the big money in a few years, this "could" be a solid decision to make their platform seem more authentic to them and potential tech investors.Can you back up how exactly this is a net improvement over their existing infrastructure? The use case of a blockchain is to log transactions across a distributed ledger, presumably because you want to avoid a single entity holding ownership over the record of transactions. What about Kickstarter's platform is going to be improved by shifting to that for their backend? The article doesn't mention if they're going to license or open source the tech to do this, and that final product translating into a true decentralized take on Kickstarter isn't guarenteed either, especially given the lead Kickstarter already has in the space. It makes some logical sense for someone to create tech like this, but it makes no sense for Kickstarter to do this since they begin a centralized company is antithetical to the main selling point of a blockchain platform.
None. The entire thing will forever be a scam.
Transparency, automatic refunds when certain criteria aren't met etc.…Why?
Like, what improvement would this make? What problem does it solve?
I was working with a few companies investing into blockchain ideas and I actually do believe there could be some very neat use cases there, but I agree that its heavily tainted with NFT crap and people cashing in on a bubble.
Why would crypto be difficult to cash out? You press the sell button on an exchange.I don't understand the benefit. Isn't crypto difficult to cash out? Isn't being able to easily access the money earned from a Kickstarter campaign extremely important? Seems like it would just create more hurdles and make Kickstarter a worse platform for crowdfunding.