it doesn't have any utility. It's not used to pay for the service. This is because of the lock up system. The lock up system prevents the token from having a direct relationship with the service. Ask yourself why the company needs to hold those tokens for users who buy the license, instead of having a smart contract that receives qnt?
At first I thought it was Gilbert wanting to insert the company into every process that involves money transfers.
But the lock up doesn't really benefit anyone. It fucks the token holders because the token has no utility. It's not good for the company because they have to delay their cash flows for a year. So why do it? The lock up is there for performance (speed & cost) of the network. If you can sever the ties between the network and the token, then the network isn't burden by the limitations of blockchains.
But then they're basically trying to take a shortcut in "solving" the interop problem without actually dealing with the problem. This half ass solution is inferior. I can go into more detail but this is long enough.
Обсуждают сегодня