Goldman Sachs

If the moat of Ethereum (ETH) is this easy to break by EOS, won’t EOS’s be as well? Just a month ago, people thought ETH would be worth 15x BTC.

Smart contract platforms' battle will be fun to watch, but in the end, they’ll all commoditize each other. This is a prisoners dilemma in action.

If you are buying Dentacoin, you are part of the problem.

The biggest question is if the entire market needs to be shaken out and if everything craters along with them.

Institutional investors entering are a big part as well. I have a feeling they won't be investing in DeepBrain Chain and Dentacoin.

The chances of Decred outcompeting Bitcoin are close to zero.

Mob rule/the rule of the rich is not ideal for neo-gold.

Only four applications have more than 500 daily active users. Ethereum's supposed use case of "decentralized applications" is clearly not where the usage is coming from — and yet blocks are still nearly full.

Speed is mostly irrelevant for SoV.

It's all about security + disinflation + proven unchangeability . . . BTC beats Nano by an enormous margin.

Holding Nano as a bet it can become a "SoV" when BTC exists is irrational, dangerous, risky.

We're on the precipice of some major applications launching: Augur, Golem, MANA, CryptoKitties with $12m of funding, etc.

Without Plasma and Sharding, I expect fees to go through the roof on ETH. And if fees are too high from low value "spam," real usage will be crowded out.

Heard a lot of claims that Augur will bring obscure bets online or obsolete bookies but many don’t realize that (1) most sport books have “obscure bets” if there’s demand and (2) bookies don’t hang in back alley ways anymore...

Dash sucks, premined, shit privacy. ZEC/XMR far better.

Full nodes on the Bitcoin blockchain store every transaction made going back to the zero block; full nodes on the Ethereum blockchain additionally store the static code (if any) associated with a given account and that code’s current state in storage.

Ethereum is between a rock and a hard place.

It isn’t as good at being SoV / Sound Money as BTC, and it is likely not going to be as smooth / cheap / frictionless at being a DApp platform as more centralized platforms like EOS.

BTC has a clear pathway to becoming an actual money. The way value accrues to VET is totally unknown.

[Kin is] catering to, and preying on, institutions that don't truly understand the space and likely have LP pressure to invest. It's much easier for them to get behind an investment with a CEO and a traditional user base. Kin was the first of this sort. I expect more to come

As has been debated endlessly, a platform controlled by 21 crypto bros is just not all that decentralized. They can collude and censor if they wish. Governments and other well resourced actors can bribe them or force them to act against their will and against the well-being and security of the people using the platform.

It has been argued that if these block producers start behaving badly, they will be voted out, and that is the main source of decentralization in the system.

Unfortunately, there is no good way for anyone to detect that they are colluding, or have been corrupted or forced into some sort of improper action. I can imagine EOS being used for some games, but not even for games that have high value tokens. It will be too easy to organize to steal value on this platform.

The Polkadot worldview sees Ethereum connected as a potential “virtual parachain” via a bridge. For any parachain to become attached to the Polkadot relay chain, it must be voted in by the holders of dots — the Polkadot system token. These voters can also choose to pause a parachain or remove a parachain from the system if it is deemed to be out of compliance with what the majority prefers. Effectively, this is a permissioned system, and white listing and blacklisting of entire parachain networks is a core tenet of the governance system of Polkadot.

One could imagine a parachain choosing to be permissionless and allowing anyone to upload any dapp, but ultimately the DOT holders might take issue with this, as they might be considered by authorities to be responsible, so it would probably be too dangerous a policy for a parachain to offer. It is likely that this will be a permissioned and highly controlled blockchain platform.

First, some context: I think the#blockchain space benefits from experimentation, including the Libra project. What does not benefit the space is a Facebook-led blockchain project, led in typical Facebook style....

Mark Zuckerberg talks about Librain terms that are quite familiar (and validating) to the people already building blockchain systems: broadening financial inclusion & fixing a broken financial system.

How they propose to achieve that with a consortium of a few dozen mega-corporations at the helm is less clear––to say nothing of their own track record with the public’s data and privacy rights, issues many on the Committee similarly raised.

The Libra story is about dominant technology players trying to shoehorn themselves into what is going to be the future of the internet. Possibly they see the writing on the wall and want to make sure they have a seat at the table when new technologies like blockchain take hold.