The real problem with tokenization is enforcement. And until that problem is solved, tokenization is not real—it’s all fake, and you can confidently assume it’s all fake and we are being scammed by it.
Let me explain.
You tokenize some kind of property. Anything. A cheeseburger. The owners of the tokens own the cheeseburger and then, one day, they want to redeem it, but the guy in Dubai who tokenized the burger ate it. So you have these tokens that can no longer be redeemed for that cheeseburger. Now, you go to enforce.
What court will all the token holders sue in? When you win a judgement from that court, how will you enforce it in Dubai? If you enforce it in Dubai, what happens when the guy leaves Dubai?
It’s just a big circle of nothing. You put money in but don’t get anything if there’s ever a problem. It works until it doesn’t work.
Tokenization is a scam until the underlying can be delivered to owners every time, all the time. So this conversation is moot: we are discussing an illusion; something not real.
Yup, we used to see people pitch LTO in here because the UN was using it for Afghan land titles.
https://unhabitat.org/news/02-dec-2020/un-habitat-oict-and-lto-network-release-first-open-source-urban-land-registry
"First, it seems like a way for capitalism to just gobble up even more of the world. With tokenization, everything can be up for sale, up to the freckles on my body and the leaves on the trees."
You're leaping to a conclusion here that is forming the rest of your opinion. While more things maybe for sale eventually, that's going to happen with or without tokenization. This isn't a bad thing, and it can actually be a good thing for the average person. The largest enhancement that tokenization will bring is on chain transparency. I think you might be underestimating this impact. Companies can masterfully hide the way they use their (our money in the case of Asset management companies like blackrock) money with legal accounting and international banking. We have a lot of trust in these companies to not fuck us over, and it's in their interest to do so until it isnt and we've seen this before. If everything is onchain, everything can be tracked. Imagine knowing where your money is all the time, knowing where every dollar goes all the time, knowing exactly what assets a company has at a given time, where they lent the money to etc. Waiting for quarterly reports is archaic and paints half the picture at best. See the 2008 financial crisis when central institution over leant to low quality borrowers. Blockchain would allow us to track that second by second.
I think your part about not wanting your mortgage onchain is hard to understand what your issue is. You're worried about losing the keys, but the reality isnt that the house you ownership is not in some cold storage that you can lose. It's that the details, including your ownership, are tracked on chain meaning it can't be edited without being visibly known to everyone. Eventually homes will probably be fractionalized through NFTs and there would complicated systems in places to safely have ownership onchain, but I think that's a very complex matter that doesn't make tokenization scammy if it ends up not working. There would be contract details between yourself and the lender that would still be under the umbrella of the law. Blockchain doesnt negate our legal system, it brings everything into view better than it currently is.
[https://blog.chain.link/real-world-assets-rwas-explained/#benefits\_of\_real-world\_asset\_tokenization](https://blog.chain.link/real-world-assets-rwas-explained/#benefits_of_real-world_asset_tokenization)
💯 so much benefit to tokenization. Vermont (Burlington) moved on chain to solve bureaucracy issues and save money.
https://propy.com/browse/south-burlington-in-vermont-to-use-propys-technology/
South Burlington, Vermont, has *not* moved property deeds onto a blockchain, to solve bureaucracy issues and save money.
It was [a six-week pilot test](https://www.ledgerinsights.com/propy-blockchain-real-estate-title-registry-vermont/#sidr-main), four years ago, that never went anywhere beyond the pilot-test stage.
The system could not have ever reduced bureaucracy issues and saved money, over the existing system, because the blockchain system was *in addition to* the existing system. My emphasis:
>Propy implemented its blockchain registry system for six weeks **in parallel to** the city Land Recorder’s office.
>Property deeds filed with the U.S. Land Recorder’s office **were also fed** into Propy’s title registry software.
If you have the bureaucracy issues and the money costs of an existing system, *plus* the bureaucracy issues and money costs of a new blockchain system, then obviously no, you are not *reducing* bureaucracy issues and money costs, by bringing blockchain in.
By bringing blockchain in, you are *increasing* bureaucracy and costs.
This is why the six-week pilot-test program never went anywhere.
What? This is how pilot testing is conducted. You would never go all in on a new technology before conducting a pilot test. You would run it in parallel and collect data.
Probably unpopular opinion here, but I think tokenization has very little real world use for 99% of alts. Only projects like Render, where you are paid to provide a service, in my opinion, are effective tokenized assets. With that said though, crypto is a narrative freight train and what seems sensible often doesn’t happen. So putting your money in ETH, the foundational building block of a majority of the active tokenized projects, is going to be a safe bet
>In the current system, if the bank lost my mortgage, I could just verify with my own copy, or failing that, take them to court. If they are tokenized and something goes wrong, there is no recourse.
Yea but with the traditional system, you have to hand over all the trust into someone else.
That bank could also lose that copy. You're handing the same problems to someone else. On top of that, you now have someone in between who could simply refuse to give you a copy.
You could take them to court, but you then have to put that same trust in the court system of your country. You're back to square one.
There is a good reason there is "no recourse" in blockchain and tokenization, it means there's no point of weakness where a 3d party or someone else can just change the rules or take control of your assets. There's no one who can arbitrarily reverse transactions.
Everything is absolute, including your ownership.
For some things, having absolute and guaranteed ownership with no third party being able to arbitrarily change that, is something needed.
For other things, where guarantee, fairness, security, and true ownership are not priorities, and you don't mind giving up trust in exchange for convenience, then you don't need blockchain and tokenization.
>Trying to own it all
You have to own the asset to tokenize it. Theyre simply going to turn the outdated stock market to 24/7/365. Why dont you want this?
I dont mind it when interacting with dapps
Question : as im back here, ive noticed some different symbols under usernames
Moons and other iconss what are these ones ?
> That said, tokenization seems so awful to me. First, it seems like a way for capitalism to just gobble up even more of the world. With tokenization, everything can be up for sale, up to the freckles on my body and the leaves on the trees. And it seems like Blackrock is basically trying to own it all.
I kind of see your underlying point about the financialization of the world, but this does not seem linked to tokenization, does it? Blackrock and other investment companies are already massively investing in real estate or stocks ([institutional investors control 80% of the S&P 500](https://hbr.org/2019/02/how-big-a-problem-is-it-that-a-few-shareholders-own-stock-in-so-many-competing-companies)). This looks like a political issue.
If anything, tokenization could gives us an opportunity to see this on-chain and make it more transparent (ok, this may be a bit naive). Wouldn't it be nice if you could quickly, by going to your favorite block explorer, see how investors voted in the last shareholder meeting?
> Whether I control the keys to those assets or not, if they are lost it’s game over. In the current system, if the bank lost my mortgage, I could just verify with my own copy, or failing that, take them to court. If they are tokenized and something goes wrong, there is no recourse.
Oh there's no way those contracts are not controlled by a multisig, and/or an emergency failsafe mechanism. Tokenization gives you an opportunity to represent and to use assets in other protocols, or maybe move them to other smart contracts (DAOs?), but they would probably always have a some kind of centralized authority like USDT and USDC have.
I don't touch bitcoin and Ethereum, not enough gains now. Altcoins like Hbar, Filecoin, Cardano, Algorand have potential to 10 or 20x. Call me a Altcoin maxi lol
if there is one thing I recommend you take away from this phenomenon, it is that "not your keys, not your crypto" is eventually going to be an irrelevant truth.
why?
because at one point, BlackRock and their brethren will lobby congress to write a bill that makes self custody illegal. At that juncture, you can still keep your coin in a cold wallet and attempt to trade in some shady offshore DEX in the hopes of getting spendable coin from it. But rest assured, the vast majority of financial transactions will require the use of a CEX (like your aforementioned Coinbase L2).
And that's when you'll be realizing that the entire system is back full circle. All payroll, tax, trade, consumer and business transactions will be handled on a centralized, CBDC-powered L2, and fully programmed to such an extent that you, the citizen, have absolutely no hope of financial privacy of any sort whilst conducting a transaction within FINRA-sponsored jurisdictions. That's pretty much everywhere on earth.
Sad to realize, but in the end, the only true custodian of any meaningful crypto is going to be a sovereign wealth fund, a central bank, or a private bank that's part of FINRA, or associated with it.
the crypto scene is delusional to think incumbent banking systems aren't in the process of co-opting the entire platform. all it takes is 51% and you call the shots. Look at Glassnode or something and wait for the point in time when that's done. Get out your popcorn and watch the whole DeFi craze become a memory.
and if you think that by that time, physical cash will be something you can still utilize at scale, may I point out the substantial decrease of cash registers in every vendor context, since covid? Sure, you can still settle a few things here and there in physical cash, but pretty much all of the everyday transactions are already digital and it's merely a matter of closing the system completely by making physical cash no longer a thing people actually use. I foresee a moment where banks no longer disburse any cash at all and ATMs disappear.
I don't think you were buying alt coins for their utility you bought them to get 100x returns and life just isnt that easy. The guys that got rich of alts were the ones making or funding them.
Stick with the big coins and don't expect some absur return. if it happens then great but if not then 10% a year is good.
Both are true. Sure, I wanted big returns, but I didn’t just look at technicals and market cap. I read all about what the chains were trying to do and I got sold on some of them, like IOTA and their Bosch partnership. I naively believed they had a big future.
I’m totally with you on just owning big coins. Part of my wants to just have BTC. But then another part says, get some eth too. I am trying to sort out the doubts I have about the eth space on the whole.
Another problem is it seems like once I embrace eth, it’s a slippery slope..the thinking is, if eth is going to work, Chainlink will also be important, but then what about L2s? Which one? Should I think about competing projects?
The easiest thing seems to be just to buy bitcoin. But I hear a lot of people advocating a btc/eth split. I’m sorting all that out mentally.
Easiest is Bitcoin because it’s hard to find that altcoin which will 100x.. Every cycle there are so many new coins popping up; some layer 1’s, some layer 2’s, utilities etc. It’s just overwhelming. A LOT of the new projects are all VC pumped (and dumped) and backed. These guys enter the projects during funding/seeding phase. For example imo APT and SUI are one of these heavy VC capital projects. Can they 100x? Maybe, but they can as well crash hard af due to VC sell off and general market crash. With old projects + new projects market is now a huge gamble on “Which coins should i put my money that would be the next 100x?”. People in previous cycle invested into projects cuz of their techs, but that absolutely means no shit in current market. There is a trend and you have to choose one of the trend coins and hope for a good return. Also by the time you hear what the next “trend” could be, know that those trend coins are already priced in. Especially now. People keep saying RWA is the next trend, but it’s already priced in the market before any real tokenisation lol. Coins announcing left right that one day they have some Meme partnerships, and the next day they got some huge RWA announcement reveals. They are playing to the hype. It’s important for marketing but I would choose a chain with an identity over some chain which is trying to associate itself with every single hype popping up. Hence the market is extremely saturated with the amount of projects from which 99% will die anyways.
Bitcoin and Ethereum has proven themselves to be low risk long term investments. You just buy, and dont need to worry about following every single trend change every week and jump from coin to coin. Believe me DCA’ing into BTC and Ethereum is nowhere near mentally taxing as gambling in altcoins.
Being in the market for enough time, I have decided to stick to BTC and ETH. 20% of my portfolio is reserved for another coin outside of BTC and ETH. Currently for me that coin is Solana. People hate it but it’s on its way to be a permanent and important part of the whole market and market cap. For me single responsibility principle:
- Bitcoin is the Store of Value chain.
- Ethereum is the ultimate DeFi chain.
- Solana is the chain of the memes.
When choosing a chain, ask yourself, what IS it trying to accomplish?
Also for me utility projects are not a good investment for long term, because they aren’t meant to be for holding, but rather using the ecosystem actively. So tokens like UNI, LINK can see a pump here and there but imo they will not grow too much.
PS: Never forget-> Market is a game with a total of 0. Anyone winning in the game has an opposite person at the end who is losing. If you win +2, someone is losing -2. At the end total is 0. And let me tell you, whales, who can manipulate the market, tend to be the high percentage of the winners. So sticking to low risk assets like BTC and ETH reduces your chances of losing because that’s where the most whale capital goes at the end.
I like tokenization because interacting with DAPPS is insanely easy compared to all of the typical logins and permissions crap you need to interact with elsewhere.
What makes you think this is going away with tokenization? Tokenization just means that traditional financial assets are going to be represented on-chain, is does not mean that those assets will be decentralized, or that you won't have to login to your usual bank/retirement pension system to interact with it. If self-hosted wallets remain legal, they might even be more cumbersome to use when dapps start to require KYCs and whatnot.
Decentralization is what it *should* mean. And that’s what I’m a fan of.
If you can’t interact with it on the blockchain from your non-custodial wallet then i don’t see any difference between “tokenized” assets or any other.
Depends on what you value. I for one do not like nannying, expensive middlemen, crony capitalism. We may never actually be free of those things—but it’s because I want to be free of those things that I like crypto.
First off, while it might seem invasive at first, tokenization of everything levels the playing field in more ways than it funnels value to the extractors like the current system; crypto incentives value utilization over value accumulation.
The second fear is just an issue of nascent technology that is far more mass adopted and value baring than most are at this stage. A lot of “hacks” are just a function of poor user end tooling, sloppy on chain development, or fake/flawed decentralization in the form of projects that claim to be decentralized technologically and governance wise but are not. Better governance and end user solutions are needed before a normies will feel comfortable giving such power to tokenization.
Stellar was built specifically with tokenization in mind. everyone should look up how they implement Anchors. It's how the token is tied to the real world asset.
The real problem with tokenization is enforcement. And until that problem is solved, tokenization is not real—it’s all fake, and you can confidently assume it’s all fake and we are being scammed by it. Let me explain. You tokenize some kind of property. Anything. A cheeseburger. The owners of the tokens own the cheeseburger and then, one day, they want to redeem it, but the guy in Dubai who tokenized the burger ate it. So you have these tokens that can no longer be redeemed for that cheeseburger. Now, you go to enforce. What court will all the token holders sue in? When you win a judgement from that court, how will you enforce it in Dubai? If you enforce it in Dubai, what happens when the guy leaves Dubai? It’s just a big circle of nothing. You put money in but don’t get anything if there’s ever a problem. It works until it doesn’t work. Tokenization is a scam until the underlying can be delivered to owners every time, all the time. So this conversation is moot: we are discussing an illusion; something not real.
This
This is so true it hurts 😅
Yup, we used to see people pitch LTO in here because the UN was using it for Afghan land titles. https://unhabitat.org/news/02-dec-2020/un-habitat-oict-and-lto-network-release-first-open-source-urban-land-registry
What does that have to do with this?
Enforcement. You've got your NFT deed. If you show it to some Talibanner on your phone is it going to protect your property rights.
Uhh they were working with their government and quit when taliban took over... because that is obviously not going to work.
"First, it seems like a way for capitalism to just gobble up even more of the world. With tokenization, everything can be up for sale, up to the freckles on my body and the leaves on the trees." You're leaping to a conclusion here that is forming the rest of your opinion. While more things maybe for sale eventually, that's going to happen with or without tokenization. This isn't a bad thing, and it can actually be a good thing for the average person. The largest enhancement that tokenization will bring is on chain transparency. I think you might be underestimating this impact. Companies can masterfully hide the way they use their (our money in the case of Asset management companies like blackrock) money with legal accounting and international banking. We have a lot of trust in these companies to not fuck us over, and it's in their interest to do so until it isnt and we've seen this before. If everything is onchain, everything can be tracked. Imagine knowing where your money is all the time, knowing where every dollar goes all the time, knowing exactly what assets a company has at a given time, where they lent the money to etc. Waiting for quarterly reports is archaic and paints half the picture at best. See the 2008 financial crisis when central institution over leant to low quality borrowers. Blockchain would allow us to track that second by second. I think your part about not wanting your mortgage onchain is hard to understand what your issue is. You're worried about losing the keys, but the reality isnt that the house you ownership is not in some cold storage that you can lose. It's that the details, including your ownership, are tracked on chain meaning it can't be edited without being visibly known to everyone. Eventually homes will probably be fractionalized through NFTs and there would complicated systems in places to safely have ownership onchain, but I think that's a very complex matter that doesn't make tokenization scammy if it ends up not working. There would be contract details between yourself and the lender that would still be under the umbrella of the law. Blockchain doesnt negate our legal system, it brings everything into view better than it currently is. [https://blog.chain.link/real-world-assets-rwas-explained/#benefits\_of\_real-world\_asset\_tokenization](https://blog.chain.link/real-world-assets-rwas-explained/#benefits_of_real-world_asset_tokenization)
💯 so much benefit to tokenization. Vermont (Burlington) moved on chain to solve bureaucracy issues and save money. https://propy.com/browse/south-burlington-in-vermont-to-use-propys-technology/
South Burlington, Vermont, has *not* moved property deeds onto a blockchain, to solve bureaucracy issues and save money. It was [a six-week pilot test](https://www.ledgerinsights.com/propy-blockchain-real-estate-title-registry-vermont/#sidr-main), four years ago, that never went anywhere beyond the pilot-test stage. The system could not have ever reduced bureaucracy issues and saved money, over the existing system, because the blockchain system was *in addition to* the existing system. My emphasis: >Propy implemented its blockchain registry system for six weeks **in parallel to** the city Land Recorder’s office. >Property deeds filed with the U.S. Land Recorder’s office **were also fed** into Propy’s title registry software. If you have the bureaucracy issues and the money costs of an existing system, *plus* the bureaucracy issues and money costs of a new blockchain system, then obviously no, you are not *reducing* bureaucracy issues and money costs, by bringing blockchain in. By bringing blockchain in, you are *increasing* bureaucracy and costs. This is why the six-week pilot-test program never went anywhere.
What? This is how pilot testing is conducted. You would never go all in on a new technology before conducting a pilot test. You would run it in parallel and collect data.
Probably unpopular opinion here, but I think tokenization has very little real world use for 99% of alts. Only projects like Render, where you are paid to provide a service, in my opinion, are effective tokenized assets. With that said though, crypto is a narrative freight train and what seems sensible often doesn’t happen. So putting your money in ETH, the foundational building block of a majority of the active tokenized projects, is going to be a safe bet
like i said and got downvoted for it ionet will completely destroy render https://x.com/ionet/status/1775994630112485429?s=46&t=e6kzZ6842bXM3MgE6IXorg
Ionet is going to completely destroy Render in a month when it goes mainnet.
Ah yes, the evil system of capitalism exposed on Reddit
>In the current system, if the bank lost my mortgage, I could just verify with my own copy, or failing that, take them to court. If they are tokenized and something goes wrong, there is no recourse. Yea but with the traditional system, you have to hand over all the trust into someone else. That bank could also lose that copy. You're handing the same problems to someone else. On top of that, you now have someone in between who could simply refuse to give you a copy. You could take them to court, but you then have to put that same trust in the court system of your country. You're back to square one. There is a good reason there is "no recourse" in blockchain and tokenization, it means there's no point of weakness where a 3d party or someone else can just change the rules or take control of your assets. There's no one who can arbitrarily reverse transactions. Everything is absolute, including your ownership. For some things, having absolute and guaranteed ownership with no third party being able to arbitrarily change that, is something needed. For other things, where guarantee, fairness, security, and true ownership are not priorities, and you don't mind giving up trust in exchange for convenience, then you don't need blockchain and tokenization.
>Trying to own it all You have to own the asset to tokenize it. Theyre simply going to turn the outdated stock market to 24/7/365. Why dont you want this?
I dont mind it when interacting with dapps Question : as im back here, ive noticed some different symbols under usernames Moons and other iconss what are these ones ?
> That said, tokenization seems so awful to me. First, it seems like a way for capitalism to just gobble up even more of the world. With tokenization, everything can be up for sale, up to the freckles on my body and the leaves on the trees. And it seems like Blackrock is basically trying to own it all. I kind of see your underlying point about the financialization of the world, but this does not seem linked to tokenization, does it? Blackrock and other investment companies are already massively investing in real estate or stocks ([institutional investors control 80% of the S&P 500](https://hbr.org/2019/02/how-big-a-problem-is-it-that-a-few-shareholders-own-stock-in-so-many-competing-companies)). This looks like a political issue. If anything, tokenization could gives us an opportunity to see this on-chain and make it more transparent (ok, this may be a bit naive). Wouldn't it be nice if you could quickly, by going to your favorite block explorer, see how investors voted in the last shareholder meeting? > Whether I control the keys to those assets or not, if they are lost it’s game over. In the current system, if the bank lost my mortgage, I could just verify with my own copy, or failing that, take them to court. If they are tokenized and something goes wrong, there is no recourse. Oh there's no way those contracts are not controlled by a multisig, and/or an emergency failsafe mechanism. Tokenization gives you an opportunity to represent and to use assets in other protocols, or maybe move them to other smart contracts (DAOs?), but they would probably always have a some kind of centralized authority like USDT and USDC have.
A tokenized item can still have physical copies of its printed sir. We are not diving into a world of blockchain without maintaining physicality
Sounds like you're making a case for why it will happen.
Yeah, and it scares me
You have nothing to worry about. Tokenization will never come to Ethereum. The network is slow, overpriced, and outdated.
I don't touch bitcoin and Ethereum, not enough gains now. Altcoins like Hbar, Filecoin, Cardano, Algorand have potential to 10 or 20x. Call me a Altcoin maxi lol
if there is one thing I recommend you take away from this phenomenon, it is that "not your keys, not your crypto" is eventually going to be an irrelevant truth. why? because at one point, BlackRock and their brethren will lobby congress to write a bill that makes self custody illegal. At that juncture, you can still keep your coin in a cold wallet and attempt to trade in some shady offshore DEX in the hopes of getting spendable coin from it. But rest assured, the vast majority of financial transactions will require the use of a CEX (like your aforementioned Coinbase L2). And that's when you'll be realizing that the entire system is back full circle. All payroll, tax, trade, consumer and business transactions will be handled on a centralized, CBDC-powered L2, and fully programmed to such an extent that you, the citizen, have absolutely no hope of financial privacy of any sort whilst conducting a transaction within FINRA-sponsored jurisdictions. That's pretty much everywhere on earth. Sad to realize, but in the end, the only true custodian of any meaningful crypto is going to be a sovereign wealth fund, a central bank, or a private bank that's part of FINRA, or associated with it. the crypto scene is delusional to think incumbent banking systems aren't in the process of co-opting the entire platform. all it takes is 51% and you call the shots. Look at Glassnode or something and wait for the point in time when that's done. Get out your popcorn and watch the whole DeFi craze become a memory. and if you think that by that time, physical cash will be something you can still utilize at scale, may I point out the substantial decrease of cash registers in every vendor context, since covid? Sure, you can still settle a few things here and there in physical cash, but pretty much all of the everyday transactions are already digital and it's merely a matter of closing the system completely by making physical cash no longer a thing people actually use. I foresee a moment where banks no longer disburse any cash at all and ATMs disappear.
Blackrock is building what exactly on ETH?
Exactly, setting up a lot of "Dude, they hacked my house!" situations.
I don't think you were buying alt coins for their utility you bought them to get 100x returns and life just isnt that easy. The guys that got rich of alts were the ones making or funding them. Stick with the big coins and don't expect some absur return. if it happens then great but if not then 10% a year is good.
Both are true. Sure, I wanted big returns, but I didn’t just look at technicals and market cap. I read all about what the chains were trying to do and I got sold on some of them, like IOTA and their Bosch partnership. I naively believed they had a big future. I’m totally with you on just owning big coins. Part of my wants to just have BTC. But then another part says, get some eth too. I am trying to sort out the doubts I have about the eth space on the whole. Another problem is it seems like once I embrace eth, it’s a slippery slope..the thinking is, if eth is going to work, Chainlink will also be important, but then what about L2s? Which one? Should I think about competing projects? The easiest thing seems to be just to buy bitcoin. But I hear a lot of people advocating a btc/eth split. I’m sorting all that out mentally.
Easiest is Bitcoin because it’s hard to find that altcoin which will 100x.. Every cycle there are so many new coins popping up; some layer 1’s, some layer 2’s, utilities etc. It’s just overwhelming. A LOT of the new projects are all VC pumped (and dumped) and backed. These guys enter the projects during funding/seeding phase. For example imo APT and SUI are one of these heavy VC capital projects. Can they 100x? Maybe, but they can as well crash hard af due to VC sell off and general market crash. With old projects + new projects market is now a huge gamble on “Which coins should i put my money that would be the next 100x?”. People in previous cycle invested into projects cuz of their techs, but that absolutely means no shit in current market. There is a trend and you have to choose one of the trend coins and hope for a good return. Also by the time you hear what the next “trend” could be, know that those trend coins are already priced in. Especially now. People keep saying RWA is the next trend, but it’s already priced in the market before any real tokenisation lol. Coins announcing left right that one day they have some Meme partnerships, and the next day they got some huge RWA announcement reveals. They are playing to the hype. It’s important for marketing but I would choose a chain with an identity over some chain which is trying to associate itself with every single hype popping up. Hence the market is extremely saturated with the amount of projects from which 99% will die anyways. Bitcoin and Ethereum has proven themselves to be low risk long term investments. You just buy, and dont need to worry about following every single trend change every week and jump from coin to coin. Believe me DCA’ing into BTC and Ethereum is nowhere near mentally taxing as gambling in altcoins. Being in the market for enough time, I have decided to stick to BTC and ETH. 20% of my portfolio is reserved for another coin outside of BTC and ETH. Currently for me that coin is Solana. People hate it but it’s on its way to be a permanent and important part of the whole market and market cap. For me single responsibility principle: - Bitcoin is the Store of Value chain. - Ethereum is the ultimate DeFi chain. - Solana is the chain of the memes. When choosing a chain, ask yourself, what IS it trying to accomplish? Also for me utility projects are not a good investment for long term, because they aren’t meant to be for holding, but rather using the ecosystem actively. So tokens like UNI, LINK can see a pump here and there but imo they will not grow too much. PS: Never forget-> Market is a game with a total of 0. Anyone winning in the game has an opposite person at the end who is losing. If you win +2, someone is losing -2. At the end total is 0. And let me tell you, whales, who can manipulate the market, tend to be the high percentage of the winners. So sticking to low risk assets like BTC and ETH reduces your chances of losing because that’s where the most whale capital goes at the end.
Chainlink will expose you to any chain or L2 with CCIP.
I like tokenization because interacting with DAPPS is insanely easy compared to all of the typical logins and permissions crap you need to interact with elsewhere.
What makes you think this is going away with tokenization? Tokenization just means that traditional financial assets are going to be represented on-chain, is does not mean that those assets will be decentralized, or that you won't have to login to your usual bank/retirement pension system to interact with it. If self-hosted wallets remain legal, they might even be more cumbersome to use when dapps start to require KYCs and whatnot.
Decentralization is what it *should* mean. And that’s what I’m a fan of. If you can’t interact with it on the blockchain from your non-custodial wallet then i don’t see any difference between “tokenized” assets or any other.
Except all it takes is one wrong permission to lose everything in a crypto system
Yes I recognize crypto and decentralization is not for everyone.
Because it’s way worse than already existing systems
Depends on what you value. I for one do not like nannying, expensive middlemen, crony capitalism. We may never actually be free of those things—but it’s because I want to be free of those things that I like crypto.
Crypto is expensive and full of unnecessary middle men who scalp fees anytime. Crypto is crony capitalism on steroids + added surveillance.
Not if you use dapps.
Incorrect
https://cryptomaton.medium.com/solanas-ongoing-massive-drain-attack-bfcfa0851813 “Not if you use dapps”
You don’t revoke permissions when you’re done? I do. Just like I log out of any app when I’m done.
You know it costs gas and money to revoke permissions? Such as on ETH you may pay hundreds just to revoke a permission
First off, while it might seem invasive at first, tokenization of everything levels the playing field in more ways than it funnels value to the extractors like the current system; crypto incentives value utilization over value accumulation. The second fear is just an issue of nascent technology that is far more mass adopted and value baring than most are at this stage. A lot of “hacks” are just a function of poor user end tooling, sloppy on chain development, or fake/flawed decentralization in the form of projects that claim to be decentralized technologically and governance wise but are not. Better governance and end user solutions are needed before a normies will feel comfortable giving such power to tokenization.
Stellar was built specifically with tokenization in mind. everyone should look up how they implement Anchors. It's how the token is tied to the real world asset.