The utility tokens will build up liquidity and value as their ecosystems grow (Binance's coin is a good example of this), but most other stand-alone cryptos that are not tied to any particular service will fade into obscurity as their liquidity dries up.
Thats what decentralization is for, everyone is allowed to have their own coin and the free market and their development teams will decide which coins live and which coins turn to dust, I say 50% of the coins that exist right now won't exist in 5 years and all the cryptoverse will be balanced, as all things should be.
The idea of perfectly market is definitely Darwinian as you state. I think that more and more choices originate from the freedom that comes from a truly free market. The products ultimately would have to compete for their space in the market and in the end the market would sort the problem of overcrowding by itself - call it Darwinian trimming if you will.
It actually gives me a measure of confidence in the crypto market to see so many choices because it reinforces a the idea of a healthy participation by people in the trade. I mean participation as producers and not just as consumers.
Do you think it is beneficial for the blockchain technology to have this many independent cryptocurrencies
I’m not against it as I see nothing bad in it, we all know the market is good only for the survival of the fittest. That’s the game here, we can have as much but only those that thrives will definitely get the most investment and it’s all happening and we can see everyday
I agree, we'll have to wait and see which of these crypto currencies survive.
And we need people like you to help us newbies and point us towards a general direction so we can research ourselves after that.
definitely not a good thing. How many coins are out there is irrelevant. What's more relevant is how many good promising projects with strong, committed teams are out there. If only 20 projects prevail and rise significantly in value, that's great. I don't think all 1000+ will though.
this is a difficult issue, because each currency has its project and reliability, some projects are not usually profitable and others do not generate confidence.
It is better to keep the ecosystem with the variety of coins that adapt to any need and pocket.
This is because of the ability to fork and create new cryptos, when we all start to understand the concepts and ideas behind perhaps there would be some evolution and extinction.
Well if the coins are too much then it would be hard to manage and their values might not be good. You will have alot of coins having very insignificant values. The fewer the better
Well, on the note I can offer two different view in it, it is good one side and bad other side, the pleasant aspects of it is that it will breed competition as people will go for the one that benefit them in term of getting the crypto mining, like steemit which actually going gives room for best investment and earning unlike other cryptography which is just based on the investment aspects of it. The bad side is that people would be more involved in the system thereby rendering it not valid again.
This is normal when something as disruptive as blockchain begins as many industries will try to apply it for its benefits. As in more startups, most will fail and disappear but pieces of even failed projects may survive for the stronger and relevant ones to improve accordingly.
The number of crypto currencies is both good and bad. Good from the point that the market decides which gain traction and succeed. While it is true that if you analyse the space from a Darwinian / Genetic perspective only the strong coins and those coins that can successfully adapt will survive the prospect large numbers of cryptos going bust simultaneously could be a major setback for cryptocurrencies as a whole. If you are a developer it is important to pick the right crypto and avoid the scam coins and those coins that will never be viable. Not an easy task with so many to choose from.
I think it is good for the crypto market and blockchain entirely because every crypto currency comes out with its own innovation by trying to solve some basic fundamental world problem and adding values to the evolution of the blockchain ecosystem @louisthomas
I think it will be of great benefit for the blockchain if there are many cryptocurrencies. It will bring about competition and also confuse "the powers that be" the more.
The world of cryptocurrency is rife with innovation which means the industry is in a constant state of evolution. The volume of cryptocurrencies you see today is simply a testament to this fact. Each of these crypto-assets represents a solution to a problem found by its creators. Even if a particular coin doesn’t stand the test of time, it will surely influence the direction of cryptocurrencies to come.
I certainly agree with the notion that it is definitely not a good thing. How many coins are out there is irrelevant. What's more relevant is how many good promising projects with strong, committed teams are out there. If only 20 projects prevail and rise significantly in value, that's great. I don't think all 1000+ will though.
still best will come out at the top !
ofcourse we will wait and see which among them survives
but while investing we need to be more carefull
and having enough knowledge before investing
I personally believe we need to weed out some cryptocurrencies and the major ones should have competition.
Now I don't think we should have 1600+ cryptocurrencies, but 500 would be amazing. Truly realistic platforms, things with working tech. Just my honest opinion!
i think many currencies is good to exist. because there are many small investor who can not afford to buy bitcoin or ether or so... but he can afford small currencies. it should be remind that small investor can play a huge roll in crypto market. so they should not be neglected. and thus small currencies should have to be existed.
Expansion and contraction occurs in all new markets. I'm sure a few will struggle and fail to get a following of devs and users. However, I fully expect a future that has millions of currencies.
Much like the conversation - Do we need 1,000s blogs? Does every person need a blog on the internet? And now, we have millions of interesting ideas being shared and read. Soon, we'll have many pockets of value created, maintained, and shared.
THere may be 1k+ but for me there are 3 (plus some I have never gotten out of my cold storage wallet that were forks). I hope my plan of consolidating works when the next bull run hits.
The utility tokens will build up liquidity and value as their ecosystems grow (Binance's coin is a good example of this), but most other stand-alone cryptos that are not tied to any particular service will fade into obscurity as their liquidity dries up.
Thats what decentralization is for, everyone is allowed to have their own coin and the free market and their development teams will decide which coins live and which coins turn to dust, I say 50% of the coins that exist right now won't exist in 5 years and all the cryptoverse will be balanced, as all things should be.
Thanos xD
😂
The idea of perfectly market is definitely Darwinian as you state. I think that more and more choices originate from the freedom that comes from a truly free market. The products ultimately would have to compete for their space in the market and in the end the market would sort the problem of overcrowding by itself - call it Darwinian trimming if you will.
It actually gives me a measure of confidence in the crypto market to see so many choices because it reinforces a the idea of a healthy participation by people in the trade. I mean participation as producers and not just as consumers.
I’m not against it as I see nothing bad in it, we all know the market is good only for the survival of the fittest. That’s the game here, we can have as much but only those that thrives will definitely get the most investment and it’s all happening and we can see everyday
I agree, we'll have to wait and see which of these crypto currencies survive.
And we need people like you to help us newbies and point us towards a general direction so we can research ourselves after that.
I sort of agree with you.
There's many currencies that are only made for profit basically.
Most of currencies are also useless.
Most of these currencies basically do the same thing and have the same features.
I can't wait until only the strongest ones survive.
Let's hope I'm holding some of these.
definitely not a good thing. How many coins are out there is irrelevant. What's more relevant is how many good promising projects with strong, committed teams are out there. If only 20 projects prevail and rise significantly in value, that's great. I don't think all 1000+ will though.
Only the strongest and most developed will survive. That's the nature of this game..
this is a difficult issue, because each currency has its project and reliability, some projects are not usually profitable and others do not generate confidence.
It is better to keep the ecosystem with the variety of coins that adapt to any need and pocket.
I think this is too much and big part of them will not stay for long time
I do not see a point to have so many kinds i think that 100 is more and enough
It is good, but it is even better when they compete with the other cryptos, having better offers and profits.
If those +1000 cryptos compete with each other everything would be great.
This is because of the ability to fork and create new cryptos, when we all start to understand the concepts and ideas behind perhaps there would be some evolution and extinction.
Well if the coins are too much then it would be hard to manage and their values might not be good. You will have alot of coins having very insignificant values. The fewer the better
Well, on the note I can offer two different view in it, it is good one side and bad other side, the pleasant aspects of it is that it will breed competition as people will go for the one that benefit them in term of getting the crypto mining, like steemit which actually going gives room for best investment and earning unlike other cryptography which is just based on the investment aspects of it. The bad side is that people would be more involved in the system thereby rendering it not valid again.
This is normal when something as disruptive as blockchain begins as many industries will try to apply it for its benefits. As in more startups, most will fail and disappear but pieces of even failed projects may survive for the stronger and relevant ones to improve accordingly.
The number of crypto currencies is both good and bad. Good from the point that the market decides which gain traction and succeed. While it is true that if you analyse the space from a Darwinian / Genetic perspective only the strong coins and those coins that can successfully adapt will survive the prospect large numbers of cryptos going bust simultaneously could be a major setback for cryptocurrencies as a whole. If you are a developer it is important to pick the right crypto and avoid the scam coins and those coins that will never be viable. Not an easy task with so many to choose from.
I think it is good for the crypto market and blockchain entirely because every crypto currency comes out with its own innovation by trying to solve some basic fundamental world problem and adding values to the evolution of the blockchain ecosystem @louisthomas
I think it will be of great benefit for the blockchain if there are many cryptocurrencies. It will bring about competition and also confuse "the powers that be" the more.
y there so many crpotoz btw:)
i think there is nothing wrong with that
the best will survive itself
with more coins more people will be interested in crypto
I certainly agree with the notion that it is definitely not a good thing. How many coins are out there is irrelevant. What's more relevant is how many good promising projects with strong, committed teams are out there. If only 20 projects prevail and rise significantly in value, that's great. I don't think all 1000+ will though.
still best will come out at the top !
ofcourse we will wait and see which among them survives
but while investing we need to be more carefull
and having enough knowledge before investing
I think that's why a downturn in the markets is not such a bad thing as it get's rid of the bad projects faster.
This is a very complex space with many differing opinions the only democratic thing we can do is let the markets decide.
I personally believe we need to weed out some cryptocurrencies and the major ones should have competition.
Now I don't think we should have 1600+ cryptocurrencies, but 500 would be amazing. Truly realistic platforms, things with working tech. Just my honest opinion!
i think many currencies is good to exist. because there are many small investor who can not afford to buy bitcoin or ether or so... but he can afford small currencies. it should be remind that small investor can play a huge roll in crypto market. so they should not be neglected. and thus small currencies should have to be existed.
Expansion and contraction occurs in all new markets. I'm sure a few will struggle and fail to get a following of devs and users. However, I fully expect a future that has millions of currencies.
Much like the conversation - Do we need 1,000s blogs? Does every person need a blog on the internet? And now, we have millions of interesting ideas being shared and read. Soon, we'll have many pockets of value created, maintained, and shared.
Dear Louisthomas!
I have a small gift for you- your portrait:)
I hope you'll like this drawing;)
THere may be 1k+ but for me there are 3 (plus some I have never gotten out of my cold storage wallet that were forks). I hope my plan of consolidating works when the next bull run hits.