It is easy to be allured by crypto and neglect the real world. However, a new mania is coming: for a month everybody will talk about world football cup. Here at Intellectsoft Blockchain Lab we fantasized: what if there was a World Cup for cryptocurrency?
We assumed what crypto projects are the closest to bringing mass adoption of blockchain. While subjective and rather entertaining, please enjoy the road to glory by these projects.
Group A: Replace Bitcoin!
For your convenience, we have grouped the projects according to their themes and objectives. Honestly, only one project in Group A aims to replace Bitcoin (BTC): it’s Bitcoin Cash (BCH), a fork of the main chain. Others rather offer improvements to the oldest and most-known cryptocurrency.
For instance, Litecoin (LTC) is 4 times faster in terms of transaction speed (2,5 minutes per block) and is among the first projects to test new technology within the network, like the Lightning Network. Similarly, Dash (DASH) positions itself as instant and secure electronic money. Monero (XMR) has brought total anonymity to its holders, a counterweight to the Bitcoin’s pseudonymity when one could still track the owner of the public address. Finally, Zcash (ZEC) is a new star of private cryptocurrencies.
Group B: Replace Ethereum!
Ethereum (ETH) has served well as a platform for ICOs, DApps, and Crypto Kitties. However, the competition has arrived: Neo (NEO) aims to become a Chinese Ethereum with its own ecosystem.
Group C: Scalable Business
Forking Bitcoin was fun while ICOs drove more people to crypto. However, as the hype vaporized, investors started questioning the plethora of coins in existence: do we need so many cryptocurrencies? Even if they solve a problem, is there a market need? Let’s look into blockchain projects that can actually make money.
Storj (STORJ) lets people lend their computer memory while earning money. This decentralized digital storage claims to cut the cost of conventional services by 50% and bring more security to the data, at a fixed rate. Golem (GNT) serves another digital demand: computing capacity. As a result, users can lend their PC power to large organizations or individuals who need it, for a fee.
Modum (MOD) solves an issue with transporting medical products in necessary conditions saving producers up to 60% of the costs. WaltonChain (WTC) creates a business ecosystem integrating blockchain with IoT, but what it does in reality is disrupting supply chain in industry and retail. Connecting its RFID chips, the project ensures the authenticity of goods. Finally, Ripio Credit Network (RCN) liberates micro-lending in developing countries while earning an interest rate.
Group D: Plug and Play Blockchains
One cannot but agree that while bubbles pop, an infrastructure stays. There are numerous blockchain studios that understand the importance of helping others to acquire distributed ledger technologies (DLTs). We have picked these players to showcase their expertise: Stratis (STRAT), Qtum (QTUM), Komodo (KMD), Waves (WAVES), and VeChain (VEN). These are only some of the blockchain development solutions that help others implement their business ideas using ready platforms.
Centralized crypto is evil, just ask Elliot. While a “no-no” from Satoshi, such projects also serve their mission in the ecosystem. RipplePay (XRP), for instance, has been a digital currency solution for enterprises long before Bitcoin and only later incorporated blockchain to become Ripple (XRP) and improve accountability.
Tether (USDT) brought some stability to crypto traders by allowing them to fixate profits in a dollar-backed equivalent. Amazon Web Services launched Blockchain Templates offering “blockchain-as-a-service” or BaaS to compete with similar products from IBM and Oracle. But is it even decentralized? It is another question.
Meanwhile, corporations join the party exploring blockchain potential within various consortia or their own R&D labs. For example, R3 works with over 200 financial institutions using their Corda technology whereas IBM’s Hyperledger is another popular blockchain framework.
Group of Giants: The Internet of Blockchains
At least in theory, these projects are colossal. They claim to be the “everything blockchain.” Meet Ark (ARK), with the objective of allowing endless interoperability between different blockchains that work in parallel. Blocknet (BLOCK) aspires to be a “connector between blockchains, markets, and communities” using atomic swaps and interoperability. Aion (AION) makes a take on scalability and multiple blockchains issues.
Cardano (ADA) is a fully open source decentralized public blockchain and cryptocurrency which uses a research-first approach. It was among the first massive blockchain collaborations that attracted many scholars to work on the project.
Telegram Open Network or TON is a blockchain mega project by Durov brothers. Its inherent GRAM tokens will power a new decentralized and censorship-resistant economy. The authors position the project as the 5th generation blockchain which adds sharding paradigm, heterogeneous and homogeneous multichain systems and arbitrary code in addition to other characteristics.
Where Is Group F?
Well, F sometimes stands for “Fail” and we placed there projects that didn’t qualify for the World Crypto Cup. Bitconnect (BCC) — disqualifieeeeeeed! TRON (TRX) raised red flags as the community found its whitepaper mostly plagiarized and marketing overhyped. Despite the cuteness of Dogecoin (DOGE), it was always meant as a fun educational project but speculators inflated its market capitalization to $1 billion several times.
Tezos was among the biggest early ICOs that promised to be both innovative and reliable. None of it appeared true; instead, the project’s team split and spent more time in courts than on the actual development. Swisscoin and hundreds of others happened to be scams, hacks, and parodies.
About the author: Nick Kurat is a co-organizer of the “Blockchain: Rethink Trust” conference taking place in Amsterdam this June. He is also Director of Intellectsoft Blockchain Lab.
Disclaimer: The views expressed in the article are solely that of the author and do not represent those of, nor should they be attributed to CCN.