Content
@
0 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
derek
@derek
Not only do I disagree, but the reality is the opposite. Until people realize that the chain’s primary value add isn’t financial, general usefulness (much less mass adoption or onboarding or whatever) is a futile topic of discussion.
4 replies
0 recast
10 reactions
tomu
@tomu.eth
there will always be a financial aspect that adds an incentive layer discussions about why there isn’t any onboarding (infra vs apps) don’t make sense to me. the onboarding will happen progressively within apps that create solutions for specific pain points on today’s internet
0 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
Cassie Heart
@cassie
Arguably the problem comes from the fact that the given chain's primary usefulness is a consequence of its orientation towards financial use cases. There were plans to make that not the case (e.g. sharding), but they were not fully thought out or evolved to a working state, and then eventually scrapped altogether.
0 reply
0 recast
1 reaction
Filipe | surfas0x
@surfas0x.eth
I don't agree (or at least that's not what I'm working for...) but after coming back from this year's /ethcc , I also have the same takeaway... The major narratives for most people in the industry are still around more layers, infra, tokens, KOLs and TGEs. Very few conversations on consumer and proper applications unfortunately.
0 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
Apurv
@apurvkaushal
think there will be other apps, but financial use cases & speculation will continue being a significant chunk . Consequence of tokenisation of assets
0 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
