You could say that between 2017 and 2018, misunderstandings about the nature of dapps led to about $13 billion in misappropriation. While some of these ICOs may someday lead to something worth making an initial capital investment, it's hard to say that many, if any, will be. In order to overcome fundamental limitations, the technology has been improperly exploited and overcapitalized. Here I will explain the pros and cons of dapps vs contemporary web services to show how to use dapps successfully. Dapps offer a different architecture than scalable web services Given that dapps will have a hard time competing with web services, the alternative architecture offered gives dapps hope. Scalable web service architecture Web services use a client-server architecture with centralized computing. A client-server architecture means that the end user will use a remote computer to consume the service. There are usually many reasons to do this, but mainly because it's scalability. This allows a single entity to take advantage of economies of scale and share computing power or data storage with users for free (usually exchanging their data or showing them ads). Adding new users is easy because all that's needed to access the service is a lightweight, networked computing device, and most people already have PCs and cell phones. This architecture improves efficiency, so to speak. In general, security is largely outsourced to governments, so these architectures can focus strictly on efficiency. Blockchain/DAPP Architecture Blockchain uses a peer-to-peer network that enables every user to verify the entire blockchain. Verification typically requires downloading the entire blockchain and checking each transaction for compliance with the protocol in order to calculate the final state. Adding new users is harder because it requires users to have hardware capable of validating the entire blockchain in a reasonable amount of time. Owning a PC is common, but requiring hundreds of gigabytes of data and days of syncing is a UX anti-pattern. The highly distributed blockchain data makes the network more resilient to attacks. Arguably, this architecture trades efficiency for better security. Unlike web services, blockchain networks do not outsource any security to the government. More commonly, in threat models, governments are seen as adversaries. Blockchain is a cloud platform that can never be closed Cloud services are just server hardware rented out as a product. Web based hosting. In today's centralized cloud services, service providers can revoke access on their own. Instead, any code uploaded to the blockchain must reside there indefinitely. This is because the nature of blockchain verification requires all data to exist, so obnoxious or politically sensitive data cannot be removed without preventing full verification from being performed. As long as full verification is a priority, data on the blockchain cannot be censored. A full node is like a server All full nodes contain the current state as well as the entire blockchain. It also means they have a copy of each dapp and contract code. If someone wants to, they can provide access to blockchain data as a service. In other words, users have two ways to access the dapp: 1. Run your own full node. The hardware requirements are high, as is the time to verify all states. This is a UX anti-pattern, but allows anyone to run dapp code in a trust-minimized private way. 2. Full Node as a Service. Here, the client will request node data (e.g. all account information for the dapp associated with a given public key) and interact via a browser. To them, it's as if they're running a full node with very low hardware requirements. This is a more trusted, less private way to access dapps. It is also extensible. Inefficiency is the result of resistance to censorship Blockchain networks are censorship-resistant because of the highly distributed copies of the blockchain. However, a high level of distribution means that computing on dense chains or bulk data storage is prohibited. This is because hardware requirements must be kept reasonably low to keep the overall node count reasonably high. The exact number of full nodes required to resist censorship is unclear, but at the moment any service wishing to retain this property should be conservative. Once the service is centralized, there is no going back. this means: · Transaction throughput must be limited. Transactions require data storage and computation to validate. If the time required to verify all transactions in a block exceeds the average block time, then full verification is effectively prevented. Only the minimum value should be persisted on-chain. Because data is always there. · Charges are necessary to curb spam and increase operational costs of any kind. Microtransactions or applications with no minimum economic value may not make sense. Dapps achieve a new balance of features for existing censorship-resistant services Today's censorship-resistant services provide this important feature in two ways: · By hiding the location of centralized services. (eg Tor hidden services) · No single point of failure by keeping data highly distributed. (Freenet Bitmessage) The unspoken reality of smart contract platforms is that they are the result of highly distributed data storage and the addition of scalable business logic capabilities. That is, if we embed user-created APIs (smart contracts), virtual machines, formal methods of triggering transactions for those API calls, and methods of ordering transactions in a highly distributed data store (blockchain), we get a Smart contract platform. This is good news. This means that dapps offer something compelling and unique, neither of which is available on web services, nor with existing censorship-resistant services. The biggest feature difference that dapps offer is their lack of human and machine failure points. The real big problem is their scalability. This is possible with a client-server model. Why Ethereum's 'Unstoppable World Computer' Narrative Failed Dapps as censorship-resistant cloud computing are more or less the same concept as it was in 2014 as an unstoppable (i.e. censorship-resistant) world computer (i.e. cloud computer). They're not targeting the right market Blogs, adult classifieds, and anonymous marketplaces are the three most lucrative categories and require some level of censorship. Only in the first case is anyone trying to pursue a product that provides some kind of service on the Ethereum platform. But, to be fair, the Ethereum team is made up of technologists without any sense of market fit. Instead, the Ethereum community is targeting inappropriate applications that don’t need censorship resistance at all. Their main goal seems to be to use the services of a trusted intermediary, and the truth is that the additional rent imposed by a trusted intermediary is nowhere near the extra cost incurred by a decentralized architecture. Usually the largest markup products are around 50 times larger (like pharmaceuticals), but the inefficiencies of dapps are orders of magnitude higher on most metrics. They never assessed the cost It was clear to them from the start that blockchain would not provide any cost-effective services compared to traditional cloud computing platforms such as Amazon web services. Considering they are targeting the wrong (or at best sub-optimal) market, they should really be more concerned with the cost-effectiveness of their solution. They put technology ahead of the product market Ethereum is not a solution to a real-world problem. This is a generalization of a technique that itself solves a very specific problem (trust-minimized wealth transfer). With this in mind, they never optimized the architecture to solve any particular problem, and they were caught off guard when they found that Ethereum was very inefficient and cost-effective for every problem they were targeting. in conclusion Dapps are just code on the blockchain. The highly distributed blockchain data makes this code censorship resistant. Dapps have neither hardware nor artificial points of failure, a unique feature not found in other censorship-resistant technologies. In the absence of any need for such censorship-resistant stuff, it's better to use a fully centralized alternative. Ethereum was right when they called it the unstoppable world computer, they just failed to properly analyze costs or target the right markets. Indoor Digital Signage has two styles: vertical and wall-mounted. The floor standing digital signage is used in lobbies, front desks, and store entrances. The wall-mounted digital signage can be displayed horizontally or vertically, and is used in cinemas, restaurants, publicity walls and other places. Video content player,picture media player,digital signage floor standing,digital signage wall mount,Digital signage vertical Jumei Video(Shenzhen)Co.,Ltd , https://www.jmsxdisplay.com
