Blockchain transaction fees should be nil or negligible

For data producers or consumers to seriously engage with the protocol in the long run, we need to show how blockchain transaction fees won't stand in the way of their business. Building on Substrate goes a long way here, since it affords us the flexibility of Ethereum with better control over fees. Complementary solutions might be to not run a Parachain (thereby avoiding relay chain costs), using layer 2 scaling solutions such as state channels for payment settlements and rollups for transaction batching, and generally avoiding blockchain usage except where strictly beneficial.

We need to ensure attribution and payment

Good attribution and payment guarantees will be important to convince data producers to contribute to our data pool. Without those, it's unlikely they would agree to let go of their assets. Digital data is easy to copy and modify, so this is something we need to have in mind for every feature and mechanism we build.

We need to plug into the existing market

In order to get adoption, it's not enough that we deliver superior value — we need to make the Protocol easy to integrate with the most popular tools and players across the Ad Tech stack. It's important we follow the relevant industry standards and develop SDKs to reduce switching costs. By partnering with significant Ad Tech players like eyeo, we get access to significant user base (e.g. 250mio+ in their case) if we integrate nicely in their product offering and help to solve a problem for them.

We have a strong crypto market dependency

The crypto market showed significant volatility over the years with high correlation across most traded tokens. Public interest went along with that making it significantly harder to partner to "non-Blockchain" companies in down markets, driven by (often false) media perception of "gambling", "high energy consumption", "criminal black market deals" and "complex technology". This has an effect on two dimensions:
1.) Product: As some of our core strengths in the envisioned product offering will strongly rely on decentralized database technologies, some "real world" partnership opportunities with Ad Tech companies may be harder to close when blockchain is not the cool kid on the block anymore (again).
2.) Liquidity: As funding for various needed activities will be executed (partially) with FCL payments, a down market token price equals less opportunities ceteris paribus.

In a data duopoly market, we strongly depend on these 2 dominant players & their decisions

Despite being unlikely due to their capitalistic nature of profit maximizing enterprises, driven by activistic hedge funds, small and big investors looking for highest return, Google and Facebook may sacrifice some current cash cows for long-term domination/ profits. Facing regulation and changing user behavior, they might e.g. open source their data pools and e.g. generate new revenues from service business by for example helping to curate data sets for non-tech companies in an easy way, i.e. replacing some of the current new Ad Tech players.
Last modified 7mo ago