Web3 B2B and B2C models
The modern version of software in Web2, Software-as-a-service, is broadly divided in two audiences: consumers and businesses. Of course this is a spectrum and not binary, since you have business software for solo entrepreneurs and S&P 500 companies, and you have prosumer products for specialist consumers. I was not active when the internet emerged in the 1990’s, but I don’t think the line between consumer and business was a thing. Everyone was an "internet investor, VCs had internet funds, an...
Why not let legacy institutions fail?
The seed of this article came when I read Balaji’s excellent post on founding v. inheriting institutions. That post got me wondering what would happen if we just let bloated legacy institutions fail. I am not an anarchist and my hope is not for chaos to prevail. Social and economic institutions play a valuable role to help society work. We need them. But they all default to a top-down, bureaucratic format that increases costs (and inefficiencies) over time. I’d love to find examples when that...
Thinking laterally about Web3
In the grand scheme of human civilization, Web3 has a very recent history. There is relatively little historical data to look at in order to predict broad patterns in the future. If we had 100+ years of data, as we do with traditional economic and financial data, it would likely be easier to extrapolate trends into the future, since most of the possible scenarios have already played out in the past. As a fallback, I’ve been applying lateral thinking to Web3, in order to compensate for the lac...
Technology founder, product manager and investor working in the open. OpenSourced.finance is for sharing ideas. Let's BUIDL together.
Web3 B2B and B2C models
The modern version of software in Web2, Software-as-a-service, is broadly divided in two audiences: consumers and businesses. Of course this is a spectrum and not binary, since you have business software for solo entrepreneurs and S&P 500 companies, and you have prosumer products for specialist consumers. I was not active when the internet emerged in the 1990’s, but I don’t think the line between consumer and business was a thing. Everyone was an "internet investor, VCs had internet funds, an...
Why not let legacy institutions fail?
The seed of this article came when I read Balaji’s excellent post on founding v. inheriting institutions. That post got me wondering what would happen if we just let bloated legacy institutions fail. I am not an anarchist and my hope is not for chaos to prevail. Social and economic institutions play a valuable role to help society work. We need them. But they all default to a top-down, bureaucratic format that increases costs (and inefficiencies) over time. I’d love to find examples when that...
Thinking laterally about Web3
In the grand scheme of human civilization, Web3 has a very recent history. There is relatively little historical data to look at in order to predict broad patterns in the future. If we had 100+ years of data, as we do with traditional economic and financial data, it would likely be easier to extrapolate trends into the future, since most of the possible scenarios have already played out in the past. As a fallback, I’ve been applying lateral thinking to Web3, in order to compensate for the lac...
Share Dialog
Share Dialog
Technology founder, product manager and investor working in the open. OpenSourced.finance is for sharing ideas. Let's BUIDL together.

Subscribe to OpenSourced.finance

Subscribe to OpenSourced.finance
Economic activity is linked to the flow of money in the system. The more money flows, the more a society is considered productive. People use money to pay for goods and services, and the same dollar can be used to pay for many transactions in a given year. Monetary velocity is used to determine the quantity of dollars in circulation.
What would happen if people decided to hodl their currency and stored their fiat money in their bank account or under their mattress? That would mean there is less money going around. This would not be in society’s best interest, surely there would be less projects, ventures, opportunities, companies being created for lack of access to money.
Taking this concept to cryptocurrencies, a user had two main choices: to hold onto their BTC, ETH, etc. in their wallet, effectively idle, or they can flow, i.e. redeploy their funds towards productive uses, and get rewarded for making their money benefit others. Note that in both cases, to hodl or to flow, the user retains ownership of their coins.
There are many productive uses for coins, such as staking, lending/borrowing, buying up NFTs or tokens, and so. The Web3 economy, with the promise of disrupting banks in a permission-less fashion, is going to reach its full potential by increasing the money velocity. By exchanging and use the same coins for others to meet their goals.
Collectively, this will be potentially a lot more impactful and useful than keeping coins idle. Even if there are risks involved, I think that it is worth voting with your own funds and pushing for the future we want to see become reality.
The more we flow, the faster the crypto economy can reach mainstream adoption, and their full potential as a result.
Let is flow. This will create abundance for other users.
Economic activity is linked to the flow of money in the system. The more money flows, the more a society is considered productive. People use money to pay for goods and services, and the same dollar can be used to pay for many transactions in a given year. Monetary velocity is used to determine the quantity of dollars in circulation.
What would happen if people decided to hodl their currency and stored their fiat money in their bank account or under their mattress? That would mean there is less money going around. This would not be in society’s best interest, surely there would be less projects, ventures, opportunities, companies being created for lack of access to money.
Taking this concept to cryptocurrencies, a user had two main choices: to hold onto their BTC, ETH, etc. in their wallet, effectively idle, or they can flow, i.e. redeploy their funds towards productive uses, and get rewarded for making their money benefit others. Note that in both cases, to hodl or to flow, the user retains ownership of their coins.
There are many productive uses for coins, such as staking, lending/borrowing, buying up NFTs or tokens, and so. The Web3 economy, with the promise of disrupting banks in a permission-less fashion, is going to reach its full potential by increasing the money velocity. By exchanging and use the same coins for others to meet their goals.
Collectively, this will be potentially a lot more impactful and useful than keeping coins idle. Even if there are risks involved, I think that it is worth voting with your own funds and pushing for the future we want to see become reality.
The more we flow, the faster the crypto economy can reach mainstream adoption, and their full potential as a result.
Let is flow. This will create abundance for other users.
<100 subscribers
<100 subscribers
No activity yet