USP

Dazzling-Guest-3863

Just a friendly heads up:  Nowadays, there are many DEX with great UX und UI. There is no need to get ripped of by a CEX.  Most offer easy access to staking through a third party. Even off-ramping crypto, which was the last USP off CEXs, can now easily be done through a DEX.  I understand your frustration, but with staying on those ripp-off-CEX you validate their practices.

Worth_Tip_7894

Bitcoin cannot be used by everyone, it simply does not have the capacity to do that. So called "scaling solutions" like Lightening, only work at scale if there are centralised custodians, at which point the asset has no value, because it's no longer yours. Look at Chivo, what a joke. For all this limited usefulness, the network is highly unlikely to ever be able to be sufficiently secure because the cost of mining is too high. When coinbase drops, a network that can't be used by enough people will be prohibitively expensive and as such the whole system will be recognised for the dead end that it is. As it is Bitcoin has middlemen literally producing most of the blocks, and rent seeking, which is exactly what it was designed to avoid. These central players exert forces that prevent Bitcoin from changing, because if it was upgraded and made decentralized, they would lose their power. The only likely future for BTC is as a token on other P2P networks. Which is fine, but it's just a meme at that point, having no USP.

CheatedInYahtzee

The largest crypto failed on its main USP of being a digital currency, yet still has 60% mcap dominance over the entire space. That's the same as if mercedes would fail to produce any cars in the future, and switches to coffee machines, yet still holds 60% dominance in the automobile market. I call that insanity.

Pretend_Market7790

The EVM is battle tested, but doesn't really have a competitive USP. Also, it was used to fund Nazis and has a CP sympathizer weirdo as the symbol, so year, not bullish. I'm not really bullish on Web3 growth for a while. It will happen, just not in a way we expect.

Archophob

> I don't really know anything about alt coins. you don't need to. She invested, so she should explain to you what this specific coin does better than bitcoin. The USP of bitcoin is that it's by far the most de-centralised crypto currency of them all. Most network nodes, most miners, most buyers. That's why it's the best long-term store of value. Ask her. Let her explain what makes her alt coin unique. Being new and obscure is not a value in itself, but consider the possibility that your wife did some research and found a reason to believe in this coin. If she can explain her reasoning, fine. Don't get pushy, allow her to test her hypothesis. If she can't, however, don't get pushy, also. Let the seed of doubt grow some roots first.

Numerous_Ad_6142

Why do you think its undervalued? It was a solution to the scaling problems of BTC but that's not unique anymore, we have so many Layer 1s with better speed, lower prices, and more utility (smart contracts etc.). Does LTC have a USP anymore? BTC has the network and adoption going for it, but LTC not so much. It is basically a store of value coin but BTC was the winner of that niche, and we don't need two, or do we?

AdFormal8116

He’s managed to access the bond market - they cannot buy BTC directly but want in. This is his USP. As a great example Allianz bought 24% of his last round of convertible debt funding.

jam-hay

Getting all serious about Doge kills it's USP.

Romsel87

It seems that you have not been orange pilled (yet). Keep studying, you're close. Bitcoin has unique selling points: (USP): - decentralized/ no owners - unstoppable - global - permissionless - borderless - open (24/7) - a peer to peer electronic cash system - hard capped token (invention of digital scarcity) We live in a debt based system. Central Banks must continue to print money in order to keep the system afloat. If you hold a significant amount of Bitcoin you've protected yourself agsinst the debasement/money printing by Central Banks. Many people understand inflation, but they choose other merhods to protect themselves. Slowly but surely Bitcoin will win their hearts, too. The properties of Bitcoin are the best, which i mentioned as USP's. IMO, the only thing that can destroy Bitcoin is some error in the code, which seems unlikely. As long as we use internet, there will be Bitcoin, and only 21 million. Bitcoin just IS, like water, oil, wood, milk etc. It's not going anywhere.

LBG-13Sudowoodo

Unfortunately, when the main use cases for the token is staking and governance, this is the case... I wonder if this is a marketable USP

Archophob

> If there is money to be made by creating a competing network, it will be done. it's being done all the time. It just can't compete. Because Bitcoin's USP is decentralization. You can't create a "more decentralized" network from scratch, it would need another 15 years to get enough participants. So, all Alt Coins compromise on decentralization to get any other aspect "better". Each and any of those compromises makes those Alt Coins worse Store-of-Value. So, they can't compete in that aspect.

Archophob

>There are much better cryptocurrencies <darien.s.nakamoto.face.jpg>***Nope.*** The USP of bitcoin is that it's maximally decentralised. Any shitcoin that trades decentralisation for transaction volume is a waste of disk space and computing power, because a centralised system doesn't need a blockchain.

SwordfishSerious5351

Didn't he already make anti btc speeches in the past? He has no idea and just goes with whatever is popular, as populsits do... lol he has no USP, just FUD.

Elfbart

Wait what, wasn’t no-kYC their main USP??

Octopus-Pawn

What crypto, NFTs, storage, and other blockchain products give is free infrastructure that anyone can tap into. That’s the real USP for small businesses and individuals. I genuinely think this is going to be huge.

DC600A

I am firmly behind Oasis because they have the best narrative which will shape the crypto and web3 space for years to come - privacy. The USP of [Oasis](https://oasisprotocol.org/blog) is its smart privacy solutions along with cross-chain capabilities that will influence next-gen AI utility, confidential DeFi, confidential gaming, confidential NFTs, DID, account abstraction as evident from its recent partnerships across various web3 ecosystems.

DC600A

>While the hype may drive initial interest in tokenization, its true value lies in its utility—the ability to address real-world challenges and streamline financial transactions. By striking a balance between excitement and practicality, tokenization can pave the way for a more transparent, efficient, and inclusive financial ecosystem. Well-said. It is true that people often look for short-term gains and that leads to huge hype that doesn't match utility and falls short of expectation. That's why the true test of any project is its long-term utility and how it can traverse the web2 and the web3. I am a big believer in Oasis because it is pioneering smart privacy - something that can enhance account abstraction, decetealized and responsible AI, DeFi, SocialFi, GameFi, data NFTs, etc and help web2 users adopt web3 easily. The USP of Oasis, IMO, is how it puts privacy first but not compromising compliance, thereby creating a balance of customizable, compliant privacy. Use cases will come and ecosystem will grow when there is a strong underlying technology in place that will remain relevant always, and not just during bull cycles or responding to hype.

DC600A

None of the above. I am a fan of [Oasis](https://oasisprotocol.org/) - the pioneers of smart privacy solutions for web3 and AI. Its confidential computation comes powered by its Sapphire confidential EVM - the first and only in production, and is also capable of cross-chain integration with any dApp on any EVM network thanks to the Oasis Privacy Layer (OPL). The Oasis vision and its technology also has the attractive USP of network gas fees being 99%+ cheaper than Ethereum making it a perfect platform for building a privacy-first, next-gen ecosystem of confidential use cases.

Big-Finding2976

I haven't bought any BCH yet but from what little I know of it, it's arguably a technically good coin that could serve a purpose. I haven't visited the BCH community yet though, so if they're as bad as you say that would definitely put me off. At this point, there are plenty of other coins offering speedy transactions, so BCH doesn't really have a USP to justify its supporters being arrogant. It's like having two shops next door to each other, both selling the same things for the same price, but one shopkeeper is really nice to potential customers, and the other one is an obnoxious offensive dick, who complains when he gets no customers and blames everyone but himself.

coinfeeds-bot

tldr; The article discusses the intersection of real estate and cryptocurrency through real estate crypto tokens, which allow for fractional ownership or access to real estate assets on a blockchain platform. It highlights the top 10 real estate crypto tokens, including LATOKEN, Propy, Rentberry, USP Token, and Contracoin, detailing their real-life usage, inherent risks, and potential future. These tokens enable investors to participate in the real estate market with lower capital, streamline international transactions, and offer solutions for the rental market and commercial real estate investment. *This summary is auto generated by a bot and not meant to replace reading the original article. As always, DYOR.

TheGarbageStore

I'd guess that 85% of hedge fund managers would spend 25 in a USP for $1t guaranteed at the end $1t is a LOT

Internet151

USP Tucson, source: https://www.bop.gov/inmateloc/

schokolai93

Not as fast and as cheap though. That was and still is the USP and unbeaten till now

fluxxis

Can someone explain to me what Ripple is all about? I don't consider myself a crypto noob and think I get the USP of almost any project in the top 30 but I never understood Ripple at all.

Due_Performer5094

What do you mean 'can do all the things you can with real money'? Bitcoins difference is it can't be printed to oblivion. That's its USP, it's not trying to improve those aspects. It's designed to hold value with a verified finite supply.

geowth

XRP doesn't require rising prices for its application, and increased adoption doesn't ensure that either. That just adds on top of the fact that it doesn't have any USP anyway.

chaoticji

You stake ETH in Lido and get stETH back as a receipt. This will generate lido yield You put stETH in eigen and generate eigen yeild. But, in eigen, it is locked So, instead you put stETH in LRT(liquid restaking). LRT will stake for you and in return you get their token as receipt. So, in total you get (Lido yield + eigen yield + LRT yield) But, since eigen's USP is to provide ethereum's security as a service, your staked ETH on eigen can be used for as many projects as you want which staks the yield. Downside is that if you fail to maintain each projects requirement, your staked eth will be slashed.

NotThatButThisGuy

.. and this isn't even the USP of Bitcoin. our daily centralized bank transactions are secured with SHA256 (sometimes even higher). my android phone can encrypt my disk using SHA256. such is the ubiquity of SHA256. thus, people saying quantum computing may break bitcoin - when we cross that bridge, we'll have much bigger problems to deal with it.

VXVWhale

This is the better cryptos on this sub. What does Morpheus network do differently to the likes of Amazon, IBM or Hyperedger fabric based supplychain solutions? There doesn't seem there's much to innovate on, what is their USP? Also have they publicly shared their revenue model?

DC600A

>**The trilemma hasn't been fully solved yet.** Check out this possible answer to the [blockchain privacy paradox](https://oasisprotocol.org/blog/demystify-the-blockchain-privacy-paradox-how-oasis-solves-this). The USP of the protocol is also its modular architecture separating consensus layer from execution layers, consisting of multiple parallel runtimes or paratimes. The Sapphire paratime is noteworthy because it is the only confidential EVM in production, and apart from functioning as L1, it also has a cross-chain L2, OPL that can integrate privacy layer to any dApp on any EVM chain. The [multi-chain scalability](https://oasisprotocol.org/blog/scaling-web3-multi-chain-autonomy) is also addressed because web3 without interoperability is unthinkable.

Objective_Digit

With Layer 2 and sidechains obviously. Why use ETH if it has to use other layers? Its USP when it came out was that it did it all on-chain, which justified its creation.

jam-hay

>What would that even achieve? Immutable authentication >Like, people don't even know to check that they are on the actual youtube channel when watching a scam video posing as elonmusk on 1 subscriber youtube channel with names like EloenMusker10929. The figures and the fact scanners are going to the trouble suggests many don't. >And wouldnt blockchain be highly inefficient and expensive in this over your more standard database solutions? No, many Blockchains aren't expensive for value transfer let alone wallet address creation. In fact I can't think of a less cost efficient way to validate.. much of the USP of Blockchain.

jawni

Not really sure what the point of it is or what its USP is. It feels like LTC to me, like it used to have a niche, but now the industry has passed it by. Why would banks use XRP when they could use a number of different smart contracts that have USDC?

mrkisswell

It used to get shilled alot by Bitboy which provided me with the first reason to dislike Solana, but when I was comparing it to Algorand - which IMO is a superior L1 on all metrics VS pretty much any other blockchain - then you realise there's just simply no reason to like the centralised, Silicon Valley hyped up, slow-arse (compared to algo) pile of junk chain that is Solana. It has no actual USP.

Objective_Digit

> But those who keep on bashing nano literally have nothing to say bad about it Let me try: The whole supply was in the developers' hands on day one. Which makes it completely centralized. It's down 97% vs. Bitcoin. Its main USP of no fees ignores the fact that people will have to pay fees to convert into something people actually want (Bitcoin or fiat). No fees means it's more open to abuse. And there is none of the real world security that PoW provides. I could go on.

powderfinger303

There he is! Thanks for joining the conversation. You are right about the circulating supply. I don't think it really matters, but what do you mean by "there is no such thing as a VET token"? You say that VTHO pays for fees, correct? This is something that is slightly different from the mana system as I understand it. Mana is more of a congestion control system. You don't 'always' need mana for transactions. *"Vechain encouraging speculative holding is a good thing. What aren’t you understanding about this?"* I'm not sure that it is a bad thing by itself, but is it not true that this kind of behavior can make the price of a transaction change? Also, in teh mana system, because mana decays, users are not incetivised to hold mana but rather use the network. Which also by itself isn't necessarily a good thing either. *"Vechain already has an entire ecosystem built with the specific purpose of making sure enterprise corporations don’t have to ever hold crypto. Iota took this idea from them*." I also think this is a good idea. I can't say they took it from Vechain, but thee are definitely parallels, so I can't say that they didn't either--no that it matters. *"Honestly, VeChain’s model is phenomenal for enterprise adoption. It was totally novel when they invented it. I don’t blame iota for adopting it. It’s a smart move by them."* I hope so. *"But still, investing in iota is shit for brains. The project is nearly dead. It did nothing last cycle, and the only reason it was relevant in ‘17 is because there were so few projects with anything more than a splash page."* This is true that compared to most other projects that I have been paying attention to, it has not performed well to say the least. I could spam links to show that they have been active and progressing, but nothing matters until their tech is both tested and delivered which it is not. We are all aware of that. The question is whether their path to adoption and to ecosystem maturity is well laid out or not, which part of this puzzle is the tokenomics. What other projects would you say are better to keep an eye on specifically and what is their USP? I was always attracted to iota because the claims of feelessness made sense to me--and still do. What do you think we should be looking for in this next cycle?

predatarian

>Good luck with your choices lol check the chart you delusional idiot. XRP has been underperforming the market for like 6 years now. XRP lost his USP a long time ago. Ripple used to scam people into believing it was the coin that works with the regulators. Turns out it is the coin who fights against the regulators. It would be really sad if you were spreading your bullshit for free. I sincerely hope that you get paid by ripple for selling out like this.

Nathanielsan

I'm gonna go against r/cc here and say the next trend is going to be marked by above board crypto and regulation and transparency is going to be a USP.

DC600A

Imo, a combination of smart privacy and account abstraction is the way to bridge the divide between traditional finance and DeFi. Account abstraction will help with the mainstream adoption of web2 into web3 which will benefit the transition into DeFi. However, the USP will be implementing smart privacy solutions that enable users to have the discretionary power to decide what to share, when to share, with whom to share, and how much to share. There are no ready examples yet, but there is a regulatory-compliant confidential DEX in the making. Check out my [post](https://www.reddit.com/r/defi/comments/17kexzp/illuminex_ama_gives_insights_on_confidential_dex/) here on their AMA.

SavageLeo19

Yeah. Without reddit I don't see any USP for moons.

Sorrytoruin

Hi, whats the biggest way you are different to the rest of the market, whats your USP?

WineMakerBg

This isn’t the first hack for Platypus. A similar event took place in February 2023. During that incident, $8.5 million was taken via a flash loan attack, targeting its newly launched stablecoin named USP.

Columbian_Throat_Job

Their USP is the fact you can earn crypro and tip websites you like with it. The business struggling is definitely of interest to the community

diwalost

Being stupid is the USP of human race or atleast the majority of it.

po00on

it's not a question of idealism. What you're promoting is contrary to Bitcoin's \*primary USP.

Longjumping-Code95

One of bitcoins USP’s* Bitcoin doesn’t care about your idealism. I don’t disagree with you necessarily, but there is a reality to all of this that’s significantly less militant.

po00on

The USP of Bitcoin is the ability to self custody. If you're in to trusted third parties, why not just stack USD on PayPal.

bull_bear25

Exactly which is both it's USP in developing new age Blockchain technology and fast adoption of Crypto. I am super optimistic about adoption in India

markcorrigans_boiler

LINK, XMR maybe...something with a USP

prettyblogro

Of course, CryptMi can be regarded as Fintech too, but mostly the USP is focused on the loyalty they offer either with fiat or crypto. Will look up Tap.

RazarusMaximus

You are right, the way I wrote that suggests I don't care for the game. That is not the case at all, I was saying that in THIS discussion the game itself is irrelevant, in the sense that I wont be discussing the design details. The GDD (Game Design Document) is complete and the absolute front of our project. The P2E is something we are scoping to see if the strategy we have come up with would work, I think without a USP of a 'self funding' market cap, the P2E aspect would be more trouble than the value added.

Emeritux

Cosmos is dope but can they continue to out-innovate competition? In Cryptos a project is only as good as they continually improve their offerings and USP. I still love ETH anytime anyway.

Objective_Digit

The main USP of Ethereum was that it could do everything on-chain. Buterin ridiculed Bitcoin's "absurd" five cent fees and lack of scalibitilty. Now he's happy for L2s to help ETH. It has failed.

cooltone

I believe ETFs open a channel for the Early Majority, Late Majority and Laggards and the means to 'cross the chasm'. A credible analysis of BTC from a 'crossing the chasm' perspective hasn't been made public as far as I am aware. Two items are essential; a USP that's a better solution to an existing problem, a defined and identifiable major market segment that is the target for adoption. This where a CTC analysis is unclear because this type of analysis is based on utility not on investment. The dominant USP(utility) is the preservation of value over the long term and this suggests depositor entities are the target segments. An arbitrage opportunity also exists (investment) as BTC finds its value position against other stores of value. Eventually the arbitrage opportunity will disappear along with those who were only interested in investment. For me ETFs are a channel for depositors and investors who do not want/are prevented from direct market access to BTC. This will make it difficult to identify the different segments but both are significantly larger than the segments in BTC today, by a few orders of magnitude.

RawLizard

'4. A reason to exist There are way better alternatives, it doesn't really have a USP. In a sensible world, Nano should be in LTC's place.

CraigAFlooz

I owned some, was pretty unique concept at the time. But like anything that had initial success it was copied well before it migrated to smrat and that loss of a USP wsd another nail in the coffin. tokens dead, money is gone, gl getting anything back

beyourownsunshine

Such a missed opportunity, especially if the creators like yourself were on board to make extra accessories. The randomly generated avatars with unique combos were their USP for me back they first dropped

jam-hay

You're totally at liberty to have a difference in opinion, but what you can't disagree with is the facts. Ripple created/ uses XRP to enable TradFi to compete with decentralised blockchain networks. That's their USP and main objective, they're not denying that.. in fact they're advertising the fact! Ripple have and are looking further partner with banks and central banks. If people want to help support banks and central banks... buy XRP.

UJ_Reddit

This is valid, but it’s also a USP that can differentiate exchanges and fuel some really interesting creativity.

satoshi_oscar_wilde

Algo has constant high inflation due to governance and staking. One of the biggest USP of algo is its governance, which turned out to be an utter flop for an outside since proposals are about how to get more algo in staking and most proposals are signed off by 1 or 2 whales. No one knows what will happen to staking rewards (which is what draws the current retail investor) after foundation exhausts its stack. Algo ecosystem has failed, look at different hype coins like yldy and that music one etc. Xrp has no program of staking. The labs only control release or buyback of xrp to maintain a price. No claims of the budding defi ecosystem - just fast, simple transactions. So tokenomics doesn't really matter in xrp

spezthemanipulator

Bitcoin being a currency is not its USP. The store of value is. So you can try convince people with arguing that the money you put in now will have the same purchasing power 40 years from now instead of 25% or less. Or compare it to real estate for better or worse. To younger people this is more difficult to convey, since they don't have 1st hand experience in seeing their savings evaporate. Either way, I withhold recommending it to people because securing your own bitcoin is difficult and its biggest hurdle, delegating it to exchanges is still a big risk where they are easier to fall than normal banks.

numecca

The utility of BTC is to store and grow wealth. And to simply transfer. A USP that is taken up by everything that came after it. It has the most liquidity though and the best meme "Digital Gold."

PokeJem7

People fucking loved that game, and I do think that kind of digital asset WOULD have some value. I think NFTs in that sense can be very consumer friendly, but businesses aren't really incentivised to do it. Digital CCGs for example could have allowed trading for years, but that's not profitable for them. It's a weird paradigm shift that would require either a few decent developers to create a consumer friendly economy, or for businesses to do it as a sort of loss leading USP "Hey come use our game, we have this cool feature". I don't see it happening, but if a couple of big games did it successfully, it could force other companies to follow suit. Indie games are getting bigger and bigger, and AAA studios are constantly losing public favour, so I guess there is a possibility of this kind of thing happening, but the amount that these businesses get away with, I am skeptical of them doing something so unprofitable.

Objective_Digit

Then why is it down 98% vs Bitcoin? It's an appalling store of value. The problem is millions of Nano can be offloaded easily as there is tons of it in the hands of people who got it with no effort. That's not inflation-less. The damage was done on day one. You lose far more money holding it than Bitcoin. Which makes "no fees" USP pointless.

Calm-Cartographer677

They completely killed their reputation and USP.

OddIndication4

If a coin has no fees and instant transaction time, it means that it is most likely very centralized which goes against the core principles of Crypto. If the USP of your coin is to be fast and have little or no fees, I can just use bank transfer or PayPal

47RichardCrawley47

I see no USP

test_user_313

What you describe as a problem is actually THE feature of Blockchain. Of course you cannot get your money back, because authorities have no power over it. That is the USP of cryptocurrency, that is the reason why you have this currency. You basically complain that it works as intended.

nutinknow

I don't see any USP

PaleFig5

I don't see any USP

mexicanwine69

Well it isn't a cheap alternative to Ethereum now we have so many layer twos, so being the home of shitcoins is kind of its USP.

47RichardCrawley47

"It is not even listed on coingecko or coinmarketcap yet. A sign of how early we are." Lol People are using their CG and CMC listing as an USP to promote their coins while you are promoting no listing on any of the platforms.

Cravensworth_redux

This was somewhat its USP when it was released. Nice to it being used though.

milonuttigrain

French police arrested 2 scumbags involves in the flash loan exploit drained protocol of over $9 million in assets and knocked Platypus USD (USP) off its peg.

HODL-THE-LINE

Getting Moons isn't even that easy. If people notice that you WANTmoons, they won't give you any. Then you must hope to place an interesting or funny comment in a post that gets a lot of traction, otherwise the quality of your post doesn't matter. Also the community acts like its basically a bad thing to want moons, yet we have them and they are a big USP of r/cryptocurrency

lunar2solar

retlqw seems to be the attacker of the flash loan exploit on Platypus's USP. Platypus is currently trying to negotiate for a fee, rather than get law enforcement involved. It would be if he just took the money instead of getting the criminal FBI involved.

ShreyashKesar

I think Secret SCRT has the best name.. because that’s literally it’s USP plus dual tone theme just works for me

CacahuateCR

And what about USDT pairs? As fair as I can see they only removed USCD-TUSD and USP pairs.

TheRidgeAndTheLadder

The technology? Nothing. However, for now, if the USP is "there are NFTs" then it's probably not of interest to me.

suninabox

> This would require over >51% of the network to agree to do that. It's much easier for the majority to agree to undo a fatal flaw then it is to convince them all to give a bunch of free money to someone else. In this case the fatal flaw would be "the security model requires fees or price to double every 210,000 blocks for 100 years and that hasn't happened because its not possible so there's not enough money to fund our massive mining farms", and the solution would not be 'giving a bunch of free money to someone else' but re-instituting block rewards that all their businesses rely on. There would be almost a complete alignment of incentive. The only disagreement might be between those who just want to double spend BTC to death and those who want to try to keep it going by invalidating the core USP. >Where do you see $500 average fees? Fees aren't paid in dollars. They're paid in sats/vbyte. I'm using it as an example of what the fees would need to be some 20-30 years from now when block rewards will have dropped to a tiny fraction of current levels, if you assume any level of growth of the network. no one uses BTC for pricing so if I said "0.0249BTC" it would make the comment date very badly since very soon 0.0249BTC would not be anywhere close to what it was when I made the comment. >If a group of miners want to make more than 21M BTC, they'd have to have a hard fork of the chain, which would devalue itself and leave the BTC Core chain unchanged. Just like when BTC was forked to remove transactions from the immutable ledger it got devalued and the original core chain continued unchanged. Oh wait it didn't because no one wants to mine a fork that doesn't make the miners money, so that original core chain doesn't exist anymore. The same incentive you're claiming will protect BTC from future changes to the money supply are the same incentives that guarantee it will happen, assuming miners don't just decide to double spend to death.

Freudarian

But you dont need the energy consumption equal to australia just to store gold in your pocket. So yes, nothing is for free. But if storage is the USP the storage side should be as cheap as possible. Or youll eat your profits just to keep it safe. The safekeeping should be very efficient at lowest cost possible. Otherwise its an expensive depreciating asset.

Quackquack1337

Stellar? Hedera has the lowest KWh per transaction becuase they only have 25 nodes. Stellar has 132 nodes with 0.00022 KWh so when scaled, Stellar is acc more energy efficient. Also has lower fees, is open source, same finality. It's not a forefront in those department by margins that make it USP anymore.

Alooffinancial

At the moment anything above 25% alts id say is really risky. But if you like risk then go for it. I'd suggest 80% BTC and ETH, 20% alts. Try to mix the alts up. So choose one that has staking, one that has a USP (like Monero), and one that is just a microcap lottery ticket.

t1n26

Just stop! Take a break and come back. Great guy and do amazing things although you have lost your USP. Take a break, re-identify with you & your audience coming back with a bang! Much love for all you have done

danjwilko

Wow calm down dude, I was just saying from what I’ve read and come across before unless proven to be false I wouldn’t touch it. If a back door was implemented for gov agencies etc to view and track network transactions where’s the privacy? The whole point of zec is privacy if that sort of thing is implemented whatever the reason then the USP of zcash is false? Nothing against zcash and the tech but if the above happens doesn’t matter how great the tech the gov has got round it.

wtf--dude

No I don't think it is suspicious. Suspicious of what exactly? Running an operation takes money. Staying solvent is important. Keeping everything in, because you have no other USP is suspicious. That is what most rug pull coins do. They are not selling regularly, which is very natural behaviour. Selling a little (less than 1%) of your holdings in a volatile asset twice a year is nothing but common sense. Especially if you have a lot of monthly expenses.

GoldMercy

I wonder what will be a USP in 2022 and won't be unique or special in 2027.

2muchdebtn0w

A lot of coins are having this existential crisis now. In 2017 having fast and cheap transactions was a USP and enough to make an impact. In 2022, having fast and cheap transactions is not unique or special.

yldf

I'm not very familiar with SOL, but I looked quite a bit into Algo, and let's not stick to ETH but also consider BTC. You're making a massive mistake. You're focusing solely on the technology, and you ignore other factors. Basically, crypto has a lot of unsolved problems. I'll try to start with bigger ones and end up with smaller ones, but order might not be entirely correct. This is also certainly not complete, just a few thoughts: * The purpose of crypto is unclear. Is it plainly an investment vehicle? If so, what kind? Is it supposed to be a currency for everyday use? An alternative to banks? * Depending on that purpose, there are different technological requirements. If it's just an investment vehicle, the transaction fees of BTC and ETH are completely fine, they're much lower than what you pay on stocks. For everyday use, online and offline payments, both speed and fees are ridiculous and it's not an option. As an alternative to banks, it might be ok for international transfers between countries that don't share the same network. If you stay within SEPA or even just SWIFT, BTC and ETH lose in terms of cost and capacity. After the merge, ETH will come closer in capacity, but still way insufficient. * BTC and ETH work on solutions to the cost and capacity problem. For BTC that's the Lightning Network, and ETH has also Layer 2 solutions. Those are not fit for use in the real world, not yet at least. It is astonishing that after such a long amount of time we have crypto right now, this is still in such an early stage. I have a clear opinion why: Because the ultimative purpose is unclear, and nobody is working focused on achieving that. * What is the purpose of NFTs? I haven't seen any sensible use of the technology on a meaningful scale. I agree the technology is an interesting one that may have real-world applications. But right now, it's partly used for fraudulent activity, and partly just because it is there without any real purpose. * Should crypto be decentralized? The original idea is yes. It should not be controlled by any entity. The reality is different. Centralized (yet unregulated) exchanges play a major role. Some coins are controlled by companies. The more independent a crypto is the more it fulfils the original idea. * Which brings us to Algo, how decentralized and independent is it? If you look into it: Not very much. Despite claiming to be decentralized, their foundation, which is a company, has a massive amount of influence. They have their governance process, which is certainly not democratic - they never claimed it to be. There are a lot of red flags here. The sale of a lot of Algo to Three Arrows Capital for the promise they don't sell them (why do you have smart contracts if you don't use them?) AT A DISCOUNT to the market price raised the question for me why they can sell it in the first place, let alone at a discount? * Algo is presented a lot as a showcase for their technology. They want to show it is technically possible to do things, like decent speed and low transaction costs. But there is no drive towards making it useful for anything. As an investment vehicle, the low transaction costs and times are a small USP if any, like I said BTC and ETH transaction costs are not a big deal for that. They would be for using it as a currency, a payment option. Are they actively working towards getting it into payment processors and making it used? Not really. Would it be a problem if they did? Perhaps even yes, because it would make their indeed quite centralized nature more transparent. * I haven't fully investigated it. They are saying the stake of the Algorand Foundation is limited. If you look at the blocks in blockchain explorer, you see quite a few blocks proposed by Algorand Foundation. However, you see even more blocks proposed by "Algorand, Inc.". Why this distinction? Is there a second player, controlled by them, who is not bound to the self-proclaimed restrictions? I don't know, that might be something, it might be nothing. But with all the things that seems fishy, it doesn't help. * What does BTC and ETH do better? First of all, BTC the only one not really controlled by some company. It's designed that way. Supply is limited (unlike ETH or Algo), and changes have to be approved by the community, if they are at all possible. It's near impossible to do much innovation based on that, that's why it is a much simpler platform than ETH. Whether that's a strength or a weakness is up for interpretation. It's also PoW, which has advantages and disadvantages, but does give them a lot of bad press. In terms of decentralization, while not perfect, it's pretty much the best system. * BTC was also... first. That's a big deal. And it has an astonishingly good name. That matters for acceptance by the masses. * ETH markets itself as a platform for innovative technologies. But in contrast to Algo they seem to get them deployed and actually used for something. Not to the extent we could talk of adoption, but a lot more so. Despite being somewhat controlled by a company, they manage to successfully convey the message it's not their own financial interest that's the main motivation for their innovation. There are still red flags to me, but way less than for Algo and other projects. &#x200B; To be honest, they all do pretty badly considering how long we are at it. BTC does the decentralization and independence game best, so far. ETH does more the innovation game, and they sell that best, marketing-wise. As long as no other projects actually achieve a purpose, like integration in a major payment provider (there are less than 10 of these, in the western world there's four major ones that might have an interest in integrating crypto eventually, and a few who don't - credit card companies - because it might destroy their own business model. Out of the four, one has integrated crypto a little bit: PayPal. You can guess which they integrated first... The project that will first be accepted as a payment option for everyday use will be the winner and have a massive market cap. If you're not BTC (and maybe even then), you have to work actively in that direction, the smaller you are, the more you have to actively work on it. None of them seem to do. If you want to please the crypto community, you have to be transparent, decentralized, and independent. None of them are (best: BTC). If you want to get things done, you have to be goal-oriented and perhaps profit-oriented and deal with major companies like Apple, Alphabet, Amazon, and PayPal (and Alibaba if you want the Chinese market), and possibly Visa and Mastercard. Those two approaches contradict each other, to some extent. The alternative is grow/develop crypto slowly till the big payment processors decide they want to integrate it and simply select which one they want. If that happens, you can bet it will be BTC or ETH, unless the market changes dramatically.

maltelandwehr

I believe the USP of Coinbase was always to be the exchange that works the most with regulators around the globe not to be the largest. Haven’t they officially fallen to position 3

ThatOne749

Personally any broker/project that is not accepting regulation/fighting against SEC about regulation (realistically in 5-10 years crypto won't exist if people don't accept some form of regulation - the USP will be quickly overtaken by banks/others) BTC and ETH will survive because of the cult-like mentality around them (and the fact that BTC is shorthand for crypto, there will always be interest in it), other than that, idk Swissborg is looking good as an exchange; aside from that so many other companies are offering crypto (ie eToro/trading212, etc) that a lot of exchanges USPs are falling away Binance is ok but is not looking like a long term thing fighting about regulations and being blacklisted from a few countries (which doesn't actually stop it doing business, it's more a symbolic thing)