/biz/ - Business & Finance

$10 eod

>>53531645

1. I'm talking update calls, ofc queries are normal "web" speed. Per the IC devs though there's increased latency in transactions between canisters and subnets and it all stacks together. To the end user it will feel much slower for anything somewhat complicated.
2. Related to the above point I'm speaking about throughput not storage capacity. Although as with anything blockchain, state growth is a concern ofc but that's not just ICP though. Data storage other than the actual ledger state itself is something that is by and large outside the scope of most other protocols which are solely concerned with the transfer of value. Dfinity is relatively unique in that regard and they have a much broader scope and goal, I frankly don't think it's a valid comparison. Most of my critiques of ICP are from the "transfer of value network" POV, I'm not saying that you can't host images and whatnot on the IC or that that isn't neat.
3. It's not bad, but people in these threads think this means they'll be able to transfer assets across to the IC and do crazy degen defi stuff with it which is not going to happen. The assets still live on their home chain and are subject to its limitations and also presents limitations on what can be done with it from the IC side of things.
4. Nobody uses dscvr kek, posts have like 30 comments at most and all people talk about is dfinity kek. Put some actual load on it and see. Semi related but since fees are payed by dApp deployers what is ICP's spam prevention mechanism? Also is if the price of ICP appreciates does that not drive up the cost for X amount of cycles?
5. Total ass pull conjecture with no evidence or reasoning. Due to the limitations I mentioned it in fact will not make sense for everything to be built on the IC.
6. A computer is literally not defined by whether you can store .jpg's kek this is just a retarded marketing point.
7. Yea I'll believe this when I see it. "Two more weeks!"