RE: Learnings from building my first dapp on EOS blockchain

You are viewing a single comment's thread from:

Learnings from building my first dapp on EOS blockchain

in eos •  9 months ago 

I had skimmed over your article previously for lack of time. Took the time now to read it carefully and it's frankly scary ...

This was about 500$ for a really simple, optimized smart contract. If I didn't do the optimizations I would have paid double that.

Update: The RAM price halfed in the last month. So it would be around 250$ now - but the high volatility of RAM price makes it hard to plan.

Comparing this to Ethereum, it's a lot what developers have to pay and this might hold new developers back from developing on EOS.
For indie developers making small fun projects to get started, it's just too much.

In old (pre-blockchain) world one might just say: "maybe it's simpler and cheaper to just have a trusted third party ..."

Look at steemmonsters - it's not a "smart contract", everything is run by aggroed and yabapmatt - all people buy and have on the steem blockchain are ... unique id that are associated with steem monsters cards ... in a database owned and controlled by the two guys above ... basically if aggroed decided that he got bored wanted to stop it, all that will remain will be records like this one, that basically mean ...


nothing without the DB behind to translate the "P-NXZ9G8VYG0" into a pack of cards or a card or something ...

And yet people have pumped tens if not hundreds of thousands of bucks into a centralized solution that uses steem to notarize and as an accounting back-end ...

What do you make of this? In my opinion, the bitcoin "trustless" ethos is not widespread ... quite the contrary, it's rather marginal. We are not optimized to trust code. On the contrary, we have been selected for generations on our ability to allocate trust between humans ...

Authors get paid when people like you upvote their post.
If you enjoyed what you read here, create your account today and start earning FREE STEEM!
Sort Order:  

I have the same observation as you do. People don't care as much about trustlessness as they should.

Most are even fine trusting casinos that provide no way to prove their fairness which is just beyond me.


Or you could look at it from the opposite angle: people are what they are, they are not going to change over the lifetime of any of us. If you wonder why they are like that, I usually seek the answer in evolutionary biology (I'm a biologist by training, although I've switched to IT 20 years ago)

Now if you start from "people are like that and I'm not going to be able to change them" the question is: "what are the goals I consider worth pursuing and how am I going to go about it?" :-)


In my opinion, most people need to be emotionally touched instead of just being logically convinced to change their behavior. Just look at countries with a lot of corruption and injustice like Venezuela, they are a lot more reluctant to trust anyone and see the benefit in trustless solutions.


No doubt, but I see the causality the other way around - we strive to build trust and trust-enforcing structures; but trust is so fragile that it will inevitably break down in certain areas at specific moments, as it happened now in Venezuela. In such situations clearly fallback "trust in the machine" solutions are a welcome backstop. But these are only temporary in my opinion - we'll revert back to human-to-human trust building interactions even in Venezula, as soon as the madness is gone