You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
RE: A Smart Contract Platform Without Transaction Costs or the Need For 'gas' Will Finally Offer Proper Incentive To DApp Developers. An 'Ownership' Model Will Always Be More Efficient Than A 'Rental' Model In Terms Of Entitlement From Stake.
I thought the way ethereum's smart contracts were supposed to work was that people requesting to use a dapp would pay a fee and that fee would be higher than the cost of the gas. In the most popular example:
Say there is an application that will tell farmers the weather for a certain ether price. The farmers request pay the fee and get their answer. But the fee they pay covers the gas, and pays the developers a tiny bit. So the developers only have to put up the initial ether and the gas pays for itself through the customers.
Now I totally understand this not being viable if the application doesn't have a good way to charge a fee.
That could work but only after the developers have paid for all the gas to get the dapp up and running, which is the main hurdle they care dealing with now. Suddenly it makes sense to me why projects like Augur are taking so long to complete. Don't know if the cost of development is the reason but that might make sense.
Just to address the development costs that you mention.
Ethereum allows developers (well anyone) to set up test networks on which they can mine test ETH tokens (https://souptacular.gitbooks.io/ethereum-tutorials-and-tips-by-hudson/content/private-chain.html), which can then be used to test dapp's before being deployed.
Yeah the cost of gas for development is not a problem. Software takes time. Not everyone slaps their app together in a month or two like Dan. This is not true.
The need for the developer to charge the customer makes it impractical for many users to use the application. A farmer wouldn't pay for something that they would retrieve just as easily through the web and using API's if they desired.
The idea of charging users for any interaction with the network is a flawed concept.
That was a very simple explanation because yes it is very retreavable info, but it would still have some applications. And even still if it were to host a website, it would be viable as long as the gas price is lower than hosting your website. So wouldn't it come down to effeciancy? Say you are paying hosting to be able to support 10k users at once, but you only had max 5k on your site. Wouldn't ethereum work better because it's dynamic and could potentially charge you less? I could be totally wrong cause I'm still trying to fully wrap my head around smart contracts.
Ethereum is far less scalable than it needs to be, and is very slow to adopt. Hosting a website on Ethereum would require users to 'pay' for the resources required to interact with the application in the first place, which is something most users are not willing to do. There's lots of good info on Ethereum and eos on youtube and Steemit as well.
This ability is coming to Ethereum in the future.
That's what I thought
Well ETH gas can be payed by the devs just like in EOS. Not many people understand this.
https://steemit.com/ethereum/@kyle.anderson/eth-obsolescence-how-the-metropolis-hardfork-allows-important-extensions-to-the-ethereum-protocol-no-transaction-fees