I have been a doubter about crypto (Bitcoin is best of the lot, I think) from the start. I think almost all of these "exchanges" are frauds if they promise anything other than a portal to acquire crypto in exchange for dollars, with the buyer holding the crypto himself, not the exchange. In the end, I think governments will step in to protect their fiat currencies, and will squash crypto, or take it over. There is simply too much power tied up in the production of money to allow the process to be decentralized.
"I failed to appreciate that centralized services would be able to provide the best user experience"
I'm a User Experience person from Web 1.0 through Web2, now working in Web 3 (more in the non-finance side of crypto, on DAOs and smart contracts). This is exactly what keeps me up at night.
The Web UX improved because 1) firms had strong incentive to beat the competition and 2) they were able to make decisions fast. Web 3 is struggling with how to make decisions fast, in a world where they try to bring the "customer" into the process. Fix that, and I'm more optimistic that decentralization can be more successful than "tech democracy".
"Part of the challenge that Elon faces with Twitter is that moving to a donscription model would require Twitter to stay on the left."
I don't think this is really true since Twitter itself isn't the content creator. Now, I am not convinced a subscription model would work for Twitter, but it seems to me a better business model if Twitter opens itself to the entire political spectrum without bias. I think Musk's real risks are personal, though- the Left actively hates him now, and they will likely go after him with legal proceedings, including criminal charges.
New York Times and “donscription”--It's worth remembering that in the world before TV major cities had multiple newspapers and people could read one that catered to their views. My father used to quip that NYT's motto really was "All the news that fits, we print." He said the NYT was the Democratic paper while the New York Herald Tribune was the Republican paper. And then were several other papers in NYC back then catering to different slices of the population. People reading news in their niches on the internet is really not a new phenomenon. It's just a bit a hubris for NYT to claim the mantle as the "paper of record."
In an era of fiat money, in which governments have grossly abused their authority to issue, an essential quality of money is missing: scarcity. Crypto is the attempt to address that missing essential.
Fiat currencies have lost their monetary function of serving as a store of value. Governments have attempted to manage that decline to a pace that doesn't provoke revolt, but the loss of value is accelerating as fiscal irresponsibility has run out of control.
Is the attempt to provide quality money once again reason enough to view Crypto in a positive light?
I think Elon Musk views twitter as a communication protocol. One use I see for it, communication between cars. Cars subscribe to hash tags (long&lat or something like what3words) along their route and communicate and coordinate through that. No need for cars to communicate directly with each other. He said several times he thought it was under utilized.
He does seem to value free speech, but he seems to be needlessly confrontational for a successful businessman. Even more so than in the past. He does not seem to value its current use.
Your analysis is missing a large disruption that upends the current equilibrium. I think GPT4 has the potential to disrupt search and Google’s search ad monopoly. Also, I think a “centralized” and highly trusted entity like Twitter or Chase could disrupt Crypto. There seems to be the potential for lots of creative destruction in the coming years in all the areas of this essay.
I am also very skeptical about “crypto” - if you think about Bitcoin and crypto being two different things. Software that needs its own money doesn’t make sense to me. (Crypto).
Digital, decentralized money that can’t be inflated, censored or controlled by captured institutions does make sense. (Bitcoin)
I have been a doubter about crypto (Bitcoin is best of the lot, I think) from the start. I think almost all of these "exchanges" are frauds if they promise anything other than a portal to acquire crypto in exchange for dollars, with the buyer holding the crypto himself, not the exchange. In the end, I think governments will step in to protect their fiat currencies, and will squash crypto, or take it over. There is simply too much power tied up in the production of money to allow the process to be decentralized.
"I failed to appreciate that centralized services would be able to provide the best user experience"
I'm a User Experience person from Web 1.0 through Web2, now working in Web 3 (more in the non-finance side of crypto, on DAOs and smart contracts). This is exactly what keeps me up at night.
The Web UX improved because 1) firms had strong incentive to beat the competition and 2) they were able to make decisions fast. Web 3 is struggling with how to make decisions fast, in a world where they try to bring the "customer" into the process. Fix that, and I'm more optimistic that decentralization can be more successful than "tech democracy".
"Part of the challenge that Elon faces with Twitter is that moving to a donscription model would require Twitter to stay on the left."
I don't think this is really true since Twitter itself isn't the content creator. Now, I am not convinced a subscription model would work for Twitter, but it seems to me a better business model if Twitter opens itself to the entire political spectrum without bias. I think Musk's real risks are personal, though- the Left actively hates him now, and they will likely go after him with legal proceedings, including criminal charges.
New York Times and “donscription”--It's worth remembering that in the world before TV major cities had multiple newspapers and people could read one that catered to their views. My father used to quip that NYT's motto really was "All the news that fits, we print." He said the NYT was the Democratic paper while the New York Herald Tribune was the Republican paper. And then were several other papers in NYC back then catering to different slices of the population. People reading news in their niches on the internet is really not a new phenomenon. It's just a bit a hubris for NYT to claim the mantle as the "paper of record."
In an era of fiat money, in which governments have grossly abused their authority to issue, an essential quality of money is missing: scarcity. Crypto is the attempt to address that missing essential.
Fiat currencies have lost their monetary function of serving as a store of value. Governments have attempted to manage that decline to a pace that doesn't provoke revolt, but the loss of value is accelerating as fiscal irresponsibility has run out of control.
Is the attempt to provide quality money once again reason enough to view Crypto in a positive light?
I think Elon Musk views twitter as a communication protocol. One use I see for it, communication between cars. Cars subscribe to hash tags (long&lat or something like what3words) along their route and communicate and coordinate through that. No need for cars to communicate directly with each other. He said several times he thought it was under utilized.
He does seem to value free speech, but he seems to be needlessly confrontational for a successful businessman. Even more so than in the past. He does not seem to value its current use.
Your analysis is missing a large disruption that upends the current equilibrium. I think GPT4 has the potential to disrupt search and Google’s search ad monopoly. Also, I think a “centralized” and highly trusted entity like Twitter or Chase could disrupt Crypto. There seems to be the potential for lots of creative destruction in the coming years in all the areas of this essay.
I am also very skeptical about “crypto” - if you think about Bitcoin and crypto being two different things. Software that needs its own money doesn’t make sense to me. (Crypto).
Digital, decentralized money that can’t be inflated, censored or controlled by captured institutions does make sense. (Bitcoin)
What do you think about smart contracts, separately from cryptocurrencies?