Sorry but I have to hardly disagree.
SMTs ans similar tokens are not as you mentioned.
For example:
I heard many ideas about Token bidding by burning sbd (sending to @null) which will decrease debt and increase value.
As explained tokens do not have to be bound to the Reward Pool.
SMTs and similar technic is just another basic infrastructure element for building dapps or other things. :)
Posted using Partiko Android
In this case, I'm all for reviewing my position. I'm just describing what I think I'm seeing now. An emission of tokens by "companies" (applications) that bring no fresh capital and have no source of revenue except the one based on the reward pool. If effectively, token emission is bind to burning SBD, that's really great and I want to see that applied.
I'm not against the ideas of SMTs, and I'm sure technical possibilities will be great. I just think that if when releasing SMTs, 99% of them have almost no to no value, that can do more harm than good. That's the only reason (that I explained) that I'm in no hurry to see SMTs being released.
I would prefer to take the time, as you just mentioned, to see this kind of mechanisms applied, have guarantees that tokens currenlty being "promised" by the big emittors have a way to guarantee a minimum value (like you said by burning SBD for example).
Yea well.. Bringing value is another chapter..
We saw the same problem with blockchain and all the new coins and then all the icos..
But I think steem and smt, infrastructure is also already worth much, because people can build things upon it. Which then brings value, because it can be used.
And in fact steem is yet already used and many would miss it.
It is a great blockchain which is capable of yet unimaginable.
(f.e. Ethereum is less capable)
Anyways great discussion. :) going to vote you and myself to increase visibility :)
Posted using Partiko Android
As said, but in fact we agree on everything (especially on the Steem blockchain value), I think SMTs are great and needed. I'm just saying there's no rush.
We wouldn't want the "infrastructure" value of the SMTs being overshadowed by a potential bloodbath with all tokens plunging to zero.
Maybe I got a vision too short term, as this will be forgotten and the intrinsic (technical) value of SMTs will persist, whether the first tokens have value or not, but I'm also very wary about "image risk" that potential "scams" or investors losing a lot of money could have.
Maybe I'm more focused on bringing more "business" value before adding more "technical" value (that for me, Steem has already plenty of, and a lot more yet undiscovered). And this "business" value can be brought now, no need for SMTs for that.
Well, better infrastructure and technic could boost the steem price..
People are waiting for years.
Steem could easily be an own, not btc dependent, market wave. :)
Doesnt the so called Business or companies, which want to build upon steem, rely on given infrastructure?
I think with a bit more development there will be many decentralized companies and projects on steem :)
Sure, but what I'm saying is that Steem in its current form (without SMTs) already has the technological base to allow development and projects (as the thriving developement community and all the new apps that flourish just prove everyday).
Of course SMTs could bring more of that.
It's just a question of point of view and perception. SMTs are much waited yes... Here on Steem. Is it the case anywhere else ? I don't know.
Personally (and that's only my opinion), I would prefer to see, for now, more apps like Oracle-D, who are business-oriented and are bringing capital in the Steem ecosystem (and not planning any SMT), than to see SMTs "the sooner the better".