[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/biz/ - Business & Finance

View post   
File: 96 KB, 2000x2000, internet-computer-icp-logo.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
57715168 No.57715168 [Reply] [Original]

I'm a developer with an IQ of 138, I've thoroughly reviewed the Internet Computer Protocol (ICP) white paper and documentation, along with various blog posts, including those from notable tech companies. Here are a few reasons why I would hesitate to use ICP for my applications:

The current state of the "mainnet" lacks true decentralization. There's no effective decentralized method to evaluate the performance or reliability of a node provider.

The development progress has been slow, taking them years to essentially create centralized nodes, which is not particularly innovative since such systems already exist. This casts doubt on the future prospects and the capabilities of their engineering team.

The white paper fails to clearly outline a viable transition from a centralized framework to a decentralized one. They touch on "decentralized" reputation systems in a superficial manner, as though the challenge of creating a Sybil-resistant decentralized reputation system is a secondary concern, despite it being a significant, unresolved issue in computer science. With years of development time and substantial funding, the lack of detailed technical specifications for this aspect is concerning. It reminds me of promises from other projects that claim they will solve centralization issues in the future, which often remain unfulfilled.

There's a lot of media buzz about partnerships with major tech firms, but a closer examination reveals that these are often overstated. For example, a tech giant's blog post might be misconstrued as a partnership when it's merely a demonstration of how ICP could potentially integrate with their services. There's no evidence of these companies committing to use ICP themselves. Moreover, if such companies decided to enter the node service market, they could likely replicate ICP's functionalities without much difficulty.

>> No.57715197

>plebbit spacing
>Saturday. Night
kek go have a long look in the mirror anon

>> No.57715274

>>57715168
Jeet

>> No.57715421

>>57715168
I'm a developer too and I can say I won't buy or build on Internet Computer Protocol simply because ICP sounds like Icy Pee and I See Pee.
"Internet Computer Protocol" itself is a dumb name too.
Presentation is just as important for products as the practical functionality of it.

That said, what do you think is a good alternative to Icy Piss? I ask this because you've made this post before (as a reply). So are you just that anti-ICP, want to keep making posts tearing it down, and don't even want to propose other networks? Just want it to go down and be defeated no matter by who?

>> No.57715657

>>57715421
Paying for Amazon Web Services using USD is a reasonable alternative to anything ICP can do, with equivalent amounts of decentralization.

>> No.57715713

>>57715657
aws is for fags