Thanks for the context and discussion Brad, our conversation inspired some of these takeaways.

By definition, DePIN is any coordination network that creates a buyer and seller market for some type of data. By that argument, a Layer 1 blockchain like Ethereum can be framed the same way, where sellers provide digital assets and on-chain services to buyers, who utilize this infrastructure and ETH to pay for these transactions. In this vein, the reason Ethereum has been incredibly successful is because it provides a 10x upgrade to existing methods of transacting and storing state: it does so in a transparent, programmable, and trustless way.

What most DePIN projects fail to identify is that to obtain a majority of an existing market, their offering has to be 10x better than the competition. They can’t rely on a marginally-better set of data that is collected in a permissionless, decentralized, and transparent manner because, frankly, buyers do not care as long as the data is somewhat reliable. And in most existing data markets, it is. The question DePIN projects need to ask is how to increase the quality, reliability, frequency, diversity, etc. of the data they are collecting and selling, which can absolutely be achieved through a blockchain backend. 

Another approach is to utilize DePIN to empower individual data providers that are otherwise censored or unable to contribute data to a global network. This questions the relationship between individual <> state. With data that is more sensitive, is actively censored, or is not actively monitored by the state, is it possible that individual citizens could override some state restrictions or shortcomings to provide visibility into this data with Internet-connected devices? This intersection could be an exciting area of opportunity for DePIN projects where independent coordination networks could provide a more accurate and holistic view while providing a resolution to state <> individual tensions.

It has become increasingly obvious that principles of privacy, transparency, and decentralization tacked on to a marginally better product is not enough. While most DePIN networks fall victim to this quality, there exist exciting areas of innovation where DePIN projects can provide strictly better data than their centralized counterparts or shed light to new data sources that are otherwise restricted or unavailable by empowering individual citizens.

Thanks for the context and discussion Brad, our conversation inspired some of these takeaways.

By definition, DePIN is any coordination network that creates a buyer and seller market for some type of data. By that argument, a Layer 1 blockchain like Ethereum can be framed the same way, where sellers provide digital assets and on-chain services to buyers, who utilize this infrastructure and ETH to pay for these transactions. In this vein, the reason Ethereum has been incredibly successful is because it provides a 10x upgrade to existing methods of transacting and storing state: it does so in a transparent, programmable, and trustless way.

What most DePIN projects fail to identify is that to obtain a majority of an existing market, their offering has to be 10x better than the competition. They can’t rely on a marginally-better set of data that is collected in a permissionless, decentralized, and transparent manner because, frankly, buyers do not care as long as the data is somewhat reliable. And in most existing data markets, it is. The question DePIN projects need to ask is how to increase the quality, reliability, frequency, diversity, etc. of the data they are collecting and selling, which can absolutely be achieved through a blockchain backend. 

Another approach is to utilize DePIN to empower individual data providers that are otherwise censored or unable to contribute data to a global network. This questions the relationship between individual <> state. With data that is more sensitive, is actively censored, or is not actively monitored by the state, is it possible that individual citizens could override some state restrictions or shortcomings to provide visibility into this data with Internet-connected devices? This intersection could be an exciting area of opportunity for DePIN projects where independent coordination networks could provide a more accurate and holistic view while providing a resolution to state <> individual tensions.

It has become increasingly obvious that principles of privacy, transparency, and decentralization tacked on to a marginally better product is not enough. While most DePIN networks fall victim to this quality, there exist exciting areas of innovation where DePIN projects can provide strictly better data than their centralized counterparts or shed light to new data sources that are otherwise restricted or unavailable by empowering individual citizens.