You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
RE: Why Ethereum Classic Will Moon
Barry Silbert and Charles Hoskinson are involved so ETC will moon? That's a weak argument imo.
The success of Ethereum is dependent on the developer ecosystem improving the protocol and building apps that are useful to people. The vast majority of the developers (and all of the devs that got Ethereum to this point) are committed to building on ETH. The fact that a few speculators have the ability to drive the price up based on their philosophical views does not mean ETC will be successful.
Can you estimate the cost of porting ETH dapps to ETC
I don't understand the question.
Could someone easily copy a dapp and run it on ETC? Sure. That's irrelevant though--- a crypto dev community is about building easy to use libraries, making changes to the protocol as necessary, etc. ETH has all the talent on this front, and ETC has none from what I've seen so far.
I am confused. If ETC can run all the ETH code easily, then doesnt that mean that anything all the wonderful ETH devs create also works with ETC?
That is the case now. My point is the code changes over time so that won't be the case for long.
Also, why would users want to use a copy cat version of a dapp?
AKAIK and this was answered for me by two upcoming DApp teams. They both don't intend to use ETC at present but could switch over if there was a convincing reason to ie market pressure.
the entire premise that ETC has no value since all devs are ETH devs has a couple fatal flaws. The first one I already pointed out and users dont really care if it is a copycat or not, if it is useful and works, that is good enough. So if ETH makes useful dapps, ETC has them.
also if you think that hoskinson has no devs or that there are no devs who will go from ETH to ETC, you are assessing the environment incorrectly. The lower cost of ETC alone is an advantage and a different set of people now have stakes in ETC and are motivated for it to succeed. this ETH maximalizm makes as much sense as bitcoin maximalism
I didn't say that ETC has no value. The value of any digital currency in the market is determined by buyers and sellers, and clearly there are buyers in the market for ETC.
All I'm saying is that I believe the long-term value of Ethereum will be determined by developers, and right now the majority of dev talent is with ETH and it's highly like that the long-term value will be in ETH. We'll see!
the recent hardfork sure seemed pretty centralized. there is a corporation and things were orchestrated very smoothly. I am sure the govts took notice, which means ETH is not a suitable chain to use for anything that any major govt is against.
until the first govt mandated hardfork is forced onto the hardfork friendly ETH chain
There are several plausible arguments against ETH, but that's not one of them.
A hard-fork is a decision voted on by the market. There's no one for a government to force a hard fork onto-- it's a consensus decision.
DCG has significant developer resources and expertise within its portfolio companies. I think Silbert realizes that the Bitcoin blockchain will be difficult to scale. A lot of DCG's portfolio companies' business models are built around the idea of the public Bitcoin blockchain. If Bitcoin can't scale, those companies will need a new public blockchain for their businesses. Given that Silbert has a significant position in ETC, it's likely that he will direct his companies to work with the Ethereum Classic blockchain.
Aside from that, ETH isn't the true Ethereum chain, Code is Law.
Do you think Coinbase will eventually allow its users to buy and sell ETC?
As far as I know, DCG is primarily a minority investor in its portfolio companies and has no decision-making power in any of them. They're investors, not developers and its a stretch to say they have any developer resources at all.
If customers want to buy/sell ETC over time, Coinbase will add it. But the vast majority of interest remains around ETH and I think that will continue based on the premise that developers make the chain, not investors.