Three competing blockchain narratives
Three competing blockchain narratives by @macbudkowski5764 🥝 • 2y • 0 views • 0 clicks | |
AI summary of the linked articleBlockchain coverage is dominated by negative narratives, and the Real narrative of decentralized, peer-to-peer technology needs more mindshare. The writer's rough estimate splits coverage into 40% Bad Actors, 40% Counter, and 20% Real, while an ideal balance would be about 80% Real with 10% each for the others. The Counter narrative is described as driven by the SEC and the US White House's stance on crypto, while Bad Actors include white-collar criminals and Ponzi schemes. Real-narrative entrepreneurs are urged to market their use cases more loudly and become better storytellers. | |
Recommended by 1 curator | |
I think all of these narratives have an element of reality in it. The counter narrative goes against the elements from the bad actors narrative. To combat those we need to combat the real elements from the bad actors narrative: we need to make it harder for bad actors to misuse and abuse crypto through self-regulation. And ZK is the technology that can accelerate this. True, if we don't self-regulate then the regulators will do it for us. Wondering how you see ZK making it harder for bad actors to abuse crypto? With ZK we can add privacy preserving KYC proofs, generated locally and without exposing any personal info to anyone. Crypto can be self regulated by imposing these gating mechanisms based on ZK. Sybils and money laundering can be reduced significantly, without requiring people to expose their ID to anyone. Of course, there are big challenges to getting there, both in the technology but also the UX. Some smaller forms of ZK can be used to make legitimate claims, reducing fake social accounts and spam, countering the fake hype issue. I think the possibilities are endless, when we fully unlock the tech and make it scalable. | |
Characters remaining: 10,000 comment guidelines | |