On the surface it all sounds technically interesting and I wish I would be excited about RGB, but I'm just not that interested in the things this provides in the end:
  • Tokens - From stablecoins and corporate shares to securities and application-specific tokens.
  • NFTs - Issue digital media (books, music, video, podcasts) and collectible items.
  • DeFi - Do a liquidity pool, AMM-based DEX, or a collateral-based algorithmic stable-coin.
  • DAOs - Run a decentralized autonomous organization with all required functionality.
Like how is this not just a rugpull generator? Do we really need a framework, platform and a protocol for generating stablecoins? How many stablecoins do we actually need? (and why would that number be more than 1?)
These are not bad questions, and I understand why many people have this reaction. 1) many people are interested in scams / useless junk; 2) even the ones who are not, are rather myopic and boring in their thinking.
I have written a newsletter post that addresses non-equilibrium monetary concepts that fill a rather large hole in the thinking of most bitcoiners who are only grasping equilibrium states. https://heaviside.substack.com/p/the-forgotten-fourth-function-of
Something I have not addressed in things such as coinjoins or similar that I have seen people mention RGB would be useful for. The RGB folks have been irritated with Taro so if this new website and new docs make it as easy to understand as Taro such that it is a truly competitive environment, I think that would be great.
Lightning Labs of course has many investors with possibly questionable motives.
reply
Started reading your article, but it lost me right here: “But there is no inherent requirement that the functions of money would be met entirely by a single good, as can be easily seen by a person that transacts in dollars and holds the bulk of their wealth in assets.”
reply
🤷‍♂️
reply