six on Warpcast

six pfp

I was thinking, you don't really need blockchains for composability/interoperability, you just need open APIs permissionless composability, blockchains do provide but if there were theoretically some non-blockchain tech that just exposed open data, and the end-result product that takes advantage of this data is the same, then the blockchain part would not be necessary for the end product

14 replies

7 recasts

101 reactions

six pfp

In this regard, money and markets are the real differentiator

1 reply

0 recast

18 reactions

links 🏴 pfp

Twitter had open APIs at one point. So did Reddit and Facebook. I think the strength of distributed infrastructure/API is that the API provider can’t put the genie back in the bottle. This is something that is achieved best with a distributed system like blockchain.

2 replies

0 recast

4 reactions

sean pfp

smart contract blockchains provide: - network enforced standards - permanent distributed storage - incentivized distributed compute - compulsory distributed work compensation - intrinsic payment system

1 reply

0 recast

4 reactions

Small Brain pfp

I am working on this

1 reply

0 recast

1 reaction

abram pfp

it costs money to provide that data, which makes it hard to be truly "open"...and then there's the issue of APIs being updated/changing making maintenance hard/time consuming...both i feel like an open consensus mechanism actually is needed?

1 reply

0 recast

1 reaction

JunyaoC pfp

I think blockchain still possess another quality of data ownership? Open API would indeed facilitate interoperability as you mentioned but did not guarantee immutability. I might be wrong tho

1 reply

0 recast

0 reaction

nicholas 🧨 pfp

hard to trust they won’t change tho

0 reply

0 recast

3 reactions

ccarella pfp

there would also need to have some kind of open consensus layer so you know someone isn’t arbitrarily changing the data on the backend. Possible. Warpcast hubs are not onchain but have verifiable data.

1 reply

0 recast

2 reactions

vrypan |--o--| pfp

If you just need access to data, yes, this is IPFS. But if you need to trust the data source, the action that was taken, etc, then you need a source of trust. The only decentralized source of trust tech I know is blockchains.

0 reply

0 recast

1 reaction

downshift pfp

i agree with this, but would add: a beautiful quality of blockchains is that they converge on protocol implementations that enforce 100% correctness of the data schema (other flavors of API fail at this often 😅)

0 reply

0 recast

1 reaction

nyc-crypto-cabal-kid pfp

nyc-crypto-cabal-kid

As you said below, blockchains provide the unruggability guarantee and enable things to be truly permissionless (which is super cool!)

0 reply

0 recast

1 reaction

ethermal.eth pfp

Open APIs don't solve data availability and transparency.

0 reply

0 recast

0 reaction

meta-david🎩 | Building Scoop3 pfp

meta-david🎩 | Building Scoop3

I can't find the cast, but I've said this for a while...open APIs have been around for a while, and I don't think touting permissionless is enough of a unique proposition to tout blockchain. Now if we say that it is an immutable single source of truth (but use layman terms), now we're talking.

0 reply

0 recast

0 reaction

Brice Yan pfp

That’s a fascinating thought! I’ve been building a protocol and a blockchain for a while, and I believe the role of the chain in solving these challenges is significant—or at least that’s been my experience. Could you please share any services that offer composability and interoperability via APIs, your insights or links would be really valuable to me

1 reply

0 recast

0 reaction