Also known as the oracle problem. Some platforms find solutions to this in a decentralized way, see Augur. The solutions to real world data being inputted into a blockchain is an economic one.
Right. Perhaps comparing the coo to checkpoints isn't an apt analogy. However, the intent is the same. Without a coo, transactions would be probabilistic and confirmed once they went above a cumulative weight threshold, but the transaction volume is still too low to prevent a Sybil attack, hence the coo. It's still an open question whether or not the tangle can function coo-less, but it makes for an interesting experiment.
IOTA is moving towards an open source coordinator (released today on github), and eventually coordicide (which is what it sounds like). It's been the goal of the project from day one. Bitcoin had checkpoints when it started; the coordinator is analogous to checkpoints. Wouldn't touch XRP with a ten foot pole, though.
That's just due to liquidity. The peg is maintained through arbitrage, so of course if you have low liquidity you're going to have fluctuations around the peg.
Isn't traceability a positive aspect for cryptocurrency in this case? You've got nothing to worry about if you're an honest investor, and frankly, this is one of the benefits of a pseudoanonymous crypto.
There's a decentralized peg to USD called DAI which is backed by ETH as collateral. It's maintained the 1$ USD peg throughout the entire crypto bear market. MakerDAO is quite impressive, and I hope to see it absorb the liquidity away from tether.
I've used it and it's fairly straight forward if you're tech savy. I bet on the midterm election, and the price of ETH. Since it's just a set of smart contracts, I expect market makers to start building 3rd party UI's to shill their markets, which should be interesting.
I remember showing a friend this really crappy online video stream in the late 90s, and I think he said something like "How can this ever be useful? I can rent a DVD and watch high quality video without any interruptions." He wasn't wrong.
That's just simply not true. Stock markets / futures markets are not decentralized in any sense of the word. You still require a 3rd party if you're going to trade derivatives over the counter.
I agree that this particular example may not seem useful (since there are other, centralized ways to trade AAPL derivatives), but the useful thing here is that it's all within the same ecosystem. I've traded for years using brokerages, clearing houses, and banks, and this removes all of that overhead. The pegs are maintained by arbitrage and this allows the removal of almost all of the overhead associated with futures markets. But that's really just the tip of the iceberg. I'm not here to convince anyone; you should convince yourselves that it's either useful or not. There's certainly a lot of real development going on if you know where to look, and the hype is warranted if you can see the whole picture.
Yeah, but it's a stablecoin pegged to the USD. This allows other projects, like dydx to create derivatives products based on this peg. You have other protocols that use the DAI peg to create stock market derivatives. Today, I can trade ETH for a token pegged to AAPL's stock on the blockchain.
I guess DAG with a merkle tree data structure would be more appropriate. Blockchain should be reserved for DAG's that use Nakamoto Consensus (or similar) to determine the longest chain.
There is an EIP 1337 "Subscription Services on the Blockchain" that I think will supplement/replace tokenomics. It's what it sounds like, a decentrilized subscription protocol that allows builders to monetize their d-apps with ETH based on recurring payments to access the services.
This is essentially the first step to web 3.0 and a universal login.
It can handle economic decisions within an organization using democracy, or multi-sigs to a few trusted individuals. It's also connected to Web 3.0, so you have all of the benefits of being within the ethereum ecosystem.