Im speaking mainly to the No votes coming from otherwise non participating pillars without engaging in any sort of constructive conversation.
Though also trying to provide some clarity on the fact that we already rely on this group, what more reasoning do we need to support their work? Its already the situation were in.
The wholistic approach means(HCone) doing all the work no one else wants to do along with some major milestones for phase 1, its no speculation this isbwhat they are already doing.
Saying we rely on them as âWe rely on them to do whatever they want and we just believe without even trying to understandâ then, no.
We all have incentives for this to go well. I personally vote no to what is unclear or what I disagree with. Somebody might know EXACTLY about stuffs but if thatâs somebody canât explain it to me he or she wonât have my vote. I leave beliefs to church people.
To me nothing changed, however thereâs a strong devs trend to go that way because Mr. Kaine said so. My issue is that Mr. Kaine, as usual, doesnât explain clearly the why and how. I donât really care if he knows the why and even if heâs right, if I donât get it, I donât go that way. I voted no to anything P2P and will continue to do so unless Iâm being proven this is really important and might see the rise of a great thing involving ZNN and BTC.
I think, long story short, Sumamu asked for a decent amount of funding, then the other team trolled with overinflated asks on A.Z just in case it passes. Not a good way to do things.
Iâm okay to host Twitter spaces to challenge / discuss with anyone thinking P2P is the way to go.
Mr Kaine currently controls the Spork creation and activation process.
He has provided no guidelines or criteria on what will or wonât be activated on mainnet.
An AMM does not seem to be one of his priorities so continuing to develop an end-to-end AMM solution that we donât know will be accepted does not make sense for the HyperCore.One team.
Will the community be willing to pay for work done even if it doesnât get activated?
If so, we can begin putting together milestones and a delivery plan.
HyperCore.One will chase the incentives that the community creates. The main data point we have right now is that the community will pay out almost solely based on acceptance by Mr Kaine so we will work towards what we are confident will get accepted.
A governance module for pillar driven spork creation and activation is something that the HyperCore.One team will pursue in the near future. But until pillars are willing to provide governance or we have more data points, pursuing something like an AMM does not make sense.
The P2P Revolution will be a thematic movement that encompasses far more than atomic swaps.
âBitcoin: A Peer-to-Peer Electronic Cash Systemâ
Some people seem to think that regulation is the main imnovation driver in this space. I would strongly challenge this notion and argue that regulation is an enabler at this point.
I think this reads as a double positive. I do think âsmartâ regulation will be a good thing and will improve adoption. Especially crypto exchanges. But if the entire system becomes KYC whatâs the point? Letâs just fire up a sql server and run value there. Right?
KYC will become control. And control will mean centralization. Over time (a long time) the only way to maintain decentralization will be p2p. But I could be very wrong too.
Market access (fiat on& offramps) is regulated. Countries where regulations are more lenient will attract more fiat which wants to enter the market. More rigid regulation is protection theatrics and will drive capital away. Existing regulatory regimes where large amounts of capital feel comfortable (HK, SGP, CH etc) will keep their importance no matter what.
Big money doesnt care about permissionlessness. Funds, asset managers, banks explicitly ask for permission.
As long as the community runs Mr Kaineâs version of znnd, we are at his mercy to merge updates and activate them on-chain.
He will arbitrarily accept or silently ignore our contributions as long as we allow him to do so.
We cannot be certain that any code we work on will be activated in production if it hasnât been sanctioned by Mr Kaine. We need a way to transfer that power to pillars.
Cool, so âdecentralizationâ is just theatrics until said power has been transferred. Does he have the finger on the button for that transfer as well?
If so, he should fund Hypercore team until that changes. I donât feel like getting my bags diluted for a product roadmap based on faith / dogma / leadership cult rather than logical reasoning & decentralized consensus. Itâs been this way long enough.
unfortunately in the US we donât have a regulatory framework. And from what I read, very large, regulated entities, steer clear of crypto b/ there is no regulatory framework (in the US).
The less regulated markets probably drive retail demand. But again my guess is the ârealâ money comes from the institutions. And they appears to be waiting for regulation.
I do think regulation is coming to the US and it could partially destroy the entire idea of cryptocurrency.
Iâm definitely not saying the market is going p2p in the next year, but itâs a possible outcome if regulation kills the idea of crypto.
Look at nostr. Imagine a global p2p messaging protocol. Itâs possible.
Forget all this. Iâm most interesting in how BTC will be a data availability layer for the P2P Revolution.
Will the community be willing to pay for work done even if it doesnât get activated?
If so, we can begin putting together milestones and a delivery plan.
What does an AMM have to do with Mr Kaine or with a spork?? Itâs supposed to be a completely independent productâŚ
Sure, we do need smartcontracts for that, but we need them for many other things anyway.
