> I was referring to the amount of useless companies that were created during the original dotcom.
No, you weren't. You literally said this: "At one point the internet was also a problem looking for a solution too"
At no point was the internet a problem looking for a solution.
> >2. Crypto peddlers keep equating cryptocurrencies to the internet. And never ever equating it to Juicero or Enron even if all signs point to that.
> Not sure what this has to do with my comment.
It has everything to do with your comment. Under an article criticising web3 you immediate response was to draw comparisons with the internet. All cryptopeddlers always draw comparisons between crypto and the internet. Or crypto and cars. Or crypto and some other world-changing invention.
And never ever do they draw comparisons between crypto and Juicero, crypto and Enron etc.
> My comment was specifically there is a decentralized solution to do commerce that is powered by crypto.
There is no such solution.
> at the very least there was a platform that transacted billions of dollars on top of Bitcoin (Silk Road).
1. I very highly doubt there were billions of dollars traded on SilkRoad
2. SilkRoad relied on a very centralised reputation system even as merchants there accepted bitcoin
3. All bitcoin "solved" was moving money for illegal activities, but not "commerce". Because actual commerce requires institutions of trust (even SilkRoad had a reputation system). And for legal activities it also needs reversebility of transactions and enforcement of rules.
No, you weren't. You literally said this: "At one point the internet was also a problem looking for a solution too"
At no point was the internet a problem looking for a solution.
> >2. Crypto peddlers keep equating cryptocurrencies to the internet. And never ever equating it to Juicero or Enron even if all signs point to that.
> Not sure what this has to do with my comment.
It has everything to do with your comment. Under an article criticising web3 you immediate response was to draw comparisons with the internet. All cryptopeddlers always draw comparisons between crypto and the internet. Or crypto and cars. Or crypto and some other world-changing invention.
And never ever do they draw comparisons between crypto and Juicero, crypto and Enron etc.
> My comment was specifically there is a decentralized solution to do commerce that is powered by crypto.
There is no such solution.
> at the very least there was a platform that transacted billions of dollars on top of Bitcoin (Silk Road).
1. I very highly doubt there were billions of dollars traded on SilkRoad
2. SilkRoad relied on a very centralised reputation system even as merchants there accepted bitcoin
3. All bitcoin "solved" was moving money for illegal activities, but not "commerce". Because actual commerce requires institutions of trust (even SilkRoad had a reputation system). And for legal activities it also needs reversebility of transactions and enforcement of rules.