Does Solana have a future?
Direct from the desk of Dane Williams.
I’m of the opinion that no, Solana doesn’t have a future due to its lack of decentralisation and VC-control.
Solana (SOL) is always in the headlines thanks to its amazing high-speed and low-cost transaction focused marketing.
No matter what you think about either of these points, you have to give the team credit for the way they have spun the narrative their way.
But does Solana have a future as a reliable blockchain platform for decentralised applications?
I’ve previously raised concerns about Solana's centralisation, arguing that it is not worth your time due to its pre-mine and the control exerted by VC insiders.
Recent news of FTX, a major Solana investor, having to sell off their holdings has only further hardened my stance that Solana is dead in 2023.
I’m sorry, no matter how hard I try, I just can’t get up for Solana.
The problem with Solana
The crux of the problem is Solana's pre-mine and distribution of tokens to VC insiders.
The argument is that as a result, Solana is not truly decentralised because a select few have control over a significant portion of the network's governance.
This lack of true decentralisation will have serious consequences for Solana's users, developers and investors.
- For users: It means that their data and transactions may not be as secure as they would be on a truly decentralised network.
- For developers: It means that they may not have as much control over the platform, limiting their ability to build decentralised applications that truly prioritise user security and privacy.
- For investors: it means that the value of their tokens may be subject to the whims of a few powerful actors, rather than the broader community.
Once you get to this point, literally what is the point of being a blockchain?
It not only goes against the principles of blockchain tech, but simple common sense surrounding the performance of blockchain vs other competing tech.
A database and servers would be more efficient
I honestly believe that Solana does not even need to be a blockchain.
I've raised concerns that Solana's supposed advantages in speed and cost could be achieved just as easily with a traditional database and well positioned servers, without the need for a blockchain at all.
If you’re controlled by a handful of people, why are you bothering with blockchain at all?
In my opinion, blockchain was little more than a buzzword used to attract investment from VCs and other investors looking to capitalise on the hype around decentralised technology.
…without any of the decentralisation because you can’t make quick, easy money there.
The truth is, many of the supposed benefits of Solana could be achieved more efficiently using traditional technology.
While blockchain tech has its advantages, such as immutability and transparency, it needs to be implemented in a way that allows them to flourish.
Something Solana monumentally failed at doing.
No, Solana doesn’t have a future
While I don’t believe Solana has a long-term future as a blockchain platform, I do see it having a future as a lightning fast database.
If you’re an investor, I’m sure you can see what I’m saying about the future value of the SOL token.
Solana's innovative technology has certainly captured the attention of some amazing project leads.
But its centralised governance and pre-mine have raised serious questions about its long-term sustainability.
In saying that however, Solana's technology is undeniably impressive.
Its ability to process transactions at the speeds it does is a testament to the project.
As a database, Solana could still have a bright future, even if its blockchain platform doesn't!
Lol.
Best of probabilities to you.
Posted Using LeoFinance Beta
I think the blockchain helps them to avoid some things they would have to do when they would simply run a database.
If it was just a database perhaps they would need a banking license or they would be like a stock exchange?
But yeah, they aren’t a blockchain in the true sense and I wouldn’t be surprised if they be implementing KYC before ETH
Call yourself blockchain and you get to play in the unregulated wild wild west 😉.
Posted Using LeoFinance Beta
https://twitter.com/1413161729106776065/status/1636605050372993026
The rewards earned on this comment will go directly to the people( @no-advice ) sharing the post on Twitter as long as they are registered with @poshtoken. Sign up at https://hiveposh.com.
I also don't think Solana has a future. It was already quite horrible when VC money was there and I believe that it was halted a few times. It doesn't make sense and I am only using Solana for the Coingecko airdrop but I honestly don't think I will use it for anything else.
Posted Using LeoFinance Beta
Oh?
What's the CoinGecko airdrop have to do with Solana?
Posted Using LeoFinance Beta
The farm LP that they give you is on Solana. So when you claimed the airdrop, you had to drop a Solana address. I don't plan on using Solana much so I just threw in a random wallet. If it's profitable at a point later, then I might send some SOLANA there to take the profit.
Posted Using LeoFinance Beta
I have never been a fan of Solana. It’s extremely centralized and has halted more times than I can count. It was nothing but a hype train in my opinion.
Haha oh the chain 'halting'.
Nothing screams blockchain more than turning it off and on again when something goes wrong...
...umm, right?
Posted Using LeoFinance Beta
Same crap started happening on all those Cosmos crap chains and we were supposed to just be okay with it, lol. Glad I dropped that ecosystem too, ewe.
Just blindly trusting your unelected overlords, with no recourse?
Yeah, no point in being a part of that system...
I am sad to hear that about Cosmos though.
It was one chain that I had high hopes for.
Posted Using LeoFinance Beta
IMO Cosmos ATOM really doesn't have much use case to begin with other than providing some chain features. The app chains all run on their own for the pay part and basically just use the same tech. So I don't know, but what I do know is the community is garbage and toxic.
nope
Posted Using LeoFinance Beta
👍.
Posted Using LeoFinance Beta
The are definitely missing the core tenets of what constitutes a blockchain. These VC insiders are standing in its way to achieving long term sustainable development. I think it will only take another major problem linked to the VCs for them to find themselves again in a precarious situation. They might not survive it the next time it happens.
They've survived the FTX dump, but I see them slowly bleeding out from here.
Just why would anyone want to build on Solana with all that risk hanging over the chain?
Just seems like a bad business decision.
Posted Using LeoFinance Beta
That's very true. I think the risk isn't worth it at all. Better find a better place to build or invest on.
Coin distribution doesn't seem so bad.
https://www.coincarp.com/currencies/solana/richlist/
I wonder if they divide the shares into multiple wallets.
Posted Using LeoFinance Beta
Yeah, pseudo-anonymous wallets listed like that make it hard to tell what's actually going on.
I say their distribution is so shit because of the numbers released at launch.
Insiders and "Foundation" (which is essentially the same thing) make up such a large number.
Now I'm sure they have distributed a bit, but there is no way that Solana isn't still controlled by an elite few 'in the know'.
Just not for me.
Posted Using LeoFinance Beta
Not for me either.
Posted Using LeoFinance Beta
Check out Safecoin bro. Much improved fork of Solana, no premine, decentralised, community owned, very low fees, very low energy use. And a DEX now on mainnet i think. https://www.safecoin.org/#/
When you first posted this, my mind went to Safemoon... which is different, right?
The skeptic in me says that anything that has 'safe' in their name, is not safe at all haha.
Anyway, I'll have a read.
Posted Using LeoFinance Beta
Decentralization is myth for most of the people. VCs like to have applications and ecosystems they can control. Solana may not have future because they are too exposed. But, I am of the opinion that they can always bounce back as I believe the future will have quasi-decentralized blockchain/database that would cater mainstream users.
Posted Using LeoFinance Beta
I do tend to agree.
There is room for all players from totally centralised, all the way through to totally decentralised.
What fills our needs, might not fill the needs of others.
The most important thing is that there is choice and the fact that fully decentralised networks do exist, means that its always there :)
Posted Using LeoFinance Beta
Yes- a spectrum of options will be available for consumers with different options.
I would tend to agree. I think most platform plays will prove to be uncompetitive for one reason or another - UNLESS - they can do something ETH cannot - AND - they become cross-chain compatible with ETH. If they do that, then they don't actually HAVE to be decentralized, because they can sort of piggy back on ETH. As ETH continues to develop, however, you have to revisit some of these chains.
E.g., MATIC has done extraordinarily well because they followed this strategy. However, it isn't clear to me that ETH with fully integrated sharding does not obsolete MATIC.
Yep, I've gotta go down the MATIC rabbit hole a bit deeper now that Ethereum has finished its upgrade.
In my mind, the entire use case for Polygon was just a cheaper Ethereum.
Well now that Ethereum fees aren't as much of an issue, why would you use Polygon??
I'm sure its deeper than that once I start looking into it, but that's my thinking at the moment.
Posted Using LeoFinance Beta
Exactly.