Connect with us

Published

on

Despite promises of “decentralization” and “trustless ownership,” the vast majority of crypto games today are, at best, partially decentralized. Web3 is the branding, but in reality, most are Web2+.Game assets live on-chain, yet the game logic, state and storage remain off-chain on centralized servers.

Why? Simply put, it’s not easy to build a fully decentralized game on-chain. Blockchains in 2023 are still far too slow for processing the gargantuan number of transactions that video games require. Lattice CEO Ludens tells Cointelegraph:

“Building a fully on-chain game right now is a little bit like building video games on a computer from the 1980s. We don’t yet have complex on-chain games yet because the blockchains – even Layer 2s – are not powerful enough right now.”

Furthermore, developers have to make important tradeoffs when using blockchain technology to make the game widely accessible to non-crypto audiences.

For instance, Aurory’s developers created a hybrid inventory system called Syncspace, which allows players to leave their assets in Aurory’s custody, but move them into their Solana wallets if they wish.



“Syncspace is Aurory’s UX strategy,” Julien Pellet, Aurory’s infrastructure technical director, tells Magazine. “Not every player wants to handle the complexities of a crypto wallet. We accepted that tradeoff by building Syncspace and allowed some assets to live off-chain in order to bring Aurory to a wider audience of non-crypto-native Web2 players”

But there are passionate communities of degens interested in full-fat, on-chain “autonomous worlds” that are built from the bottom up by the players. One group even modded a game to form a communist collective so everyone “won” the same. Autonomous worlds, as they’re sometimes known, face a lot of hurdles, but given the limitations, the early results are impressive.

Sky Strife from Lattice
Sky Strife from Lattice. (X/Twitter)

How Web3 games started

Web3 games are grappling with a bunch of other issues due to the brief history of the emerging sector. During the last crypto bull cycle, most blockchain games tried to be financial products first and video games second. 

That strategy helped catapult the play-to-earn gaming sector into brief mainstream prominence when token prices were going up. But unfortunately, if the appeal is based on delivering a financial return, then enthusiasm can disappear fast when token prices take a dive. 

Games like Axie Infinity, Pegaxy or Crabada, which once promised spectacular returns for players, have since fallen off a cliff. For Axie, unique active wallets peaked at around 700,000 in November 2021 but now tally more often in the eight to 10,000 range today.

The Metaverse Index (MVI) token, which tracks a collection of major gaming and metaverse tokens, is down 95.6% from its all-time high in November 2021.

MIT
The Metaverse Index token has been on a wild ride. (CoinMarketCap)

In response, Web3 games are now shunning the “play-to-earn” catchphrase that helped propel the sector to prominence, embracing phrases like “play-and-earn” or “play-and-own,” and deemphasizing the profits while focusing on benefits such as the ownership of game assets, or simply how fun the game is.

“At the end of the day, the core focus of games should be leisure and entertainment, not delivering a financial return,” Aurory’s backend tech director Jonathan Tang tells Magazine. 

“As Web3 game developers, our job is to think of how to leverage blockchain technology and what it brings to video gaming, while keeping the game fun as a priority.”

Some believe the emphasis on financial returns has tainted the industry’s image, not least due to an influx of scammers.

Pellet adds: “The last bull run attracted scammers that have multiple elaborate strategies such as cloned websites and fake projects to divert millions of dollars from legit players and teams. With Web2 games, it’s much harder to pull off those types of scams.”

Axie Infinity now has a much more finite number of players
Axie Infinity now has a much more finite number of players. (Axie Infinity)

Enter on-chain games

Encouragingly, however, a smaller community of builders interested in building autonomous worlds are trying to bring on-chain maximalism to blockchain games.

In contrast to their Web2.5 counterparts, fully on-chain games have their assets, and the game logic, state and storage live on-chain. The game state refers to the current status of the gaming world, such as player progression and the items they possess, while game logic simply refers to the rules of the game — how players move, interact, collect and consume. 

Why bother with having it all on-chain? Doing so ensures the game’s state is always immutable and transparent on the blockchain. But most importantly, it opens the door to the same kind of open composability that is possible in DeFi and enables an aggregator like the 1inch Network to build on top of Uniswap or Curve to integrate Synthetix and allow for cross-asset swaps. 

Composability allows anyone to build second-layer rules on top of the game’s original rules. Second-layer rules in fully on-chain games exist in the form of smart contracts on top of the core game developer’s original smart contracts. They are simultaneously experienced by all players in the game, unlike third-party mods in traditional gaming that simply alter the player’s local gaming experience.

Read also


Features

Satoshi may have needed an alias, but can we say the same?


Features

Lushsux: A decade of ass-whoopin’ and skullduggery in a single NFT 

Collective action

Take, for example, the on-chain RPG Dark Forest, built on the Gnosis chain in 2019 by pseudonymous creator Gubsheep. Dark Forest saw groups of players in their own DAO (DFDAO) creating permissionless guild systems through external smart contracts. With the guild system, small players were able to overcome collective action problems in competing against big whale players by pooling their own in-game resources together. As DFDAO put it in its blog:

“Someone needs to beat orden_gg. Orden_gg has won twice in a row and is at the top of the leaderboard as we speak. If we band together for a collective victory, we can defeat Dark Forest’s unofficial raid boss together.”

Dark Forest is a decentralized MMO space conquest strategy game
Dark Forest is a decentralized MMO space conquest strategy game. (Medium)

DFDAO co-founder toe knee told Magazine: “The Astral Colossus (guild) was a mini game ‘above’ the core DF contracts, but in the eyes of the DF core contract, it was just another player. Instead of being an EOA account like everyone else, it was a smart contract with custom logic that shaped how it would behave differently. This contract was non-upgradeable and verified so players could confirm for themselves that we couldn’t change the rules and we couldn’t keep their planets after they donated.”

Dark Forest players have also created their own in-game marketplaces or even forked the game entirely onto a different chain/layer 2 — Gnosis Optimism. The new game – Dark Forest Arena – introduced new gaming modes previously unavailable.

Dark Forest
Dark Forest Arena.

Communist take over

Or take another on-chain game, OPCraft, a Minecraft-inspired experiment built by the Lattice team on Optimism. Weeks into the launch of the game, one player, calling himself SupremeLeaderOP, created a “communist society” where any player that opted into the guild would give up all their resources and share them with every other player in the society. 

These rules were not a social promise between players. They were binding and tied to an on-chain smart contract. SupremeLeaderOP could not, even if he so desired, rescind his promises to players or bend the rules of his communist guild. Some players saw the guild as a wacky fun experiment and immediately swore allegiance to the communist Republic, in the process, giving up all their in-game resources in return for access to the guild’s collective treasury. As documented on the Lattice blog: 

“Once a player had become a comrade, they were able to — through smart contracts that the Supreme Leader had deployed — mine material for the government treasury and build using treasury material on top of government owned land! The Republic even had a ‘social credit’ system to prevent freeloading comrades from spending more material from the treasury than they have contributed. Free loading comrades were not allowed to build anymore until they had ‘repaired their social credit’ through contributing their labor.”

In fully on-chain games, players can implement innovative changes rather than having to wait for a core developer to introduce the updates through a centralized patch. It’s a level of bottom-up spontaneous creative expression that extends far beyond how we traditionally think of video gaming, but in the Web2 world, experimenters tinkering around on custom game mods eventually spawned billion-dollar game franchises such as Dota and Counter-Strike. Dota was first created permissionlessly as a mod on Blizzard’s Warcraft 3 game, while Counter-Strike was birthed from a mod on Valve’s Half-Life game. 

The on-chain gaming space is nascent, and builders in this space still refer to fully on-chain games very differently. The popular autonomous worlds label was coined by Lattice Labs, but other builders in the on-chain space have referred to the concept as eternal games, infinite games or on-chain realities.

Although the terminology varies, the common denominator underlying these games is hard permanence on the blockchain. Just as smart contracts and tokens will forever exist on-chain, fully on-chain games remain fully uncensorable and alive long after a gaming studio abandons the game.

The tradeoff? Most on-chain crypto games currently resemble turn-based board games with simple game loops like Space Invaders and Pac-Man in the early era of video games.

Limitations, limitations, limitations

In creating the on-chain racing game Rhauscau, creator Stokarz tells Magazine he had to make a bunch of necessary tradeoffs in game design due to cost limitations.

“The reason why most on-chain games follow a traditional board game design with minimal game logic is because executing it all on-chain is inexpensive. On the smart contract level, it’s a one-dimensional play with agents simply changing the positioning of the play.”

Although Rhauscau is deployed on the layer-2 Arbitrum Nova, which boasts a throughput speed far higher than Ethereum mainnet, the game is still limited to simple game loops that last five minutes tops.

“The first tradeoff with Rhauscau’s game design was that it had to be centered around one simple game loop. Too complex games mean more transaction speeds, which would make it too costly for users to pay for it. It’s similar to early mobile games like Cut the Rope,” Stokarz added.

Partially decentralized Web2.5 games don’t face the same trade-offs as on-chain games because the only crypto layer within their games is assets in the form of nonfungible tokens. 

But they make an important sacrifice in another regard: the game’s open composability.

Read also


Features

Here’s how Ethereum’s ZK-rollups can become interoperable


Features

You don’t need to be angry about NFTs

Future of on-chain games

No one denies fully on-chain games face an uphill battle, and scalability isn’t the only problem.

Ludens emphasizes that the immature state of on-chain games is also due to game designers lacking a set of coherent guiding game design principles for building on blockchain ledgers. “Game designers should think harder about how to harvest the full affordances of a blockchain ledger in their game design.”

But blockchain and software infrastructure is an issue.

“On old video games, we saw simplistic text adventure games first. When computers got faster, then came FPS games like Doom. With higher computational power on the blockchain, it will further increase what we can do with game design.”

Games started as text based RPGs and moved on to first person shooters like Doom 1993
Games started as text-based RPGs and moved on to first-person shooters like Doom 1993. (Doom/Britannica)

“Getting chain infrastructure to a higher throughput would obviously help scale on-chain games greatly. It would allow sharding of the game’s state and executing it together on multiple chains at the same time.”

On the software side of things, he wonders what game engines like Lattice’s MUD (multi-user-dungeon) will look like years down the road. “Can MUD write powerful enough applications as we continue to push it?”

Today’s video game market is dominated by the Unreal and Unity game engines. Commercial game engines like Unreal only emerged in 1998 after decades of experimentation. Today, they serve as the go-to software framework for game developers to create a game efficiently with much less technical complexity.

MUD aims to achieve something similar for blockchain game developers. The software stack streamlines the task of building an EVM app with various development tools like an on-chain database.

On-chain and on ZK-rollups

Ethereum’s roadmap is built around scaling via ZK-rollups, and there’s a big opportunity on the various layer 2s for game designers to take advantage of faster and cheaper transactions. A small collection of builders on Starknet believe that the layer-2’s zero-knowledge proof native architecture is much better poised to scale a fully on-chain game.

Cartridge is building its own game engine called Dojo, among other developer tools for Starknet game developers. Its founder, Tarrance van As, believes that Starknet is the only one with a tractable path to scalability for hundreds of thousands of users eventually.

“With Dojo, game developers get a baseline capability of the framework because everything is provable all the time,” he tells Magazine.

“In the future, your game is not even going to be a layer 2 but a layer 3 or layer 4 on top of Starknet,” he says, referring to bespoke blockchain environments designed for specific types of applications that are built in another layer on top of the layer 2. But he adds ZK-proofs can even be generated on the same local PC running the gameplay.

“With ZK-proofs, you can even have logic computed on the client itself. We may even be able to run the game on our local device and simply provide the proofs that it was done correctly thanks to the mathematical integrity of ZK-tech.”

Van As sees a world of opportunity opening up and believes that in years to come, on-chain games will resemble blockchains a lot more than traditional AAA games. 

“On-chain games are free from the restrictions of traditional game publishers such as a financial runway, development cycle and its closed nature. They resemble Ethereum much more in the sense that it evolved from an emergent, bottom-up culture.”

Donovan Choy

Donovan Choy

Based in Singapore, Donovan Choy previously wrote about crypto for the Bankless newsletter. He published his first book ‘Liberalism Unveiled’ in 2021, an analysis of Singapore’s political economy. He enjoys satire, spaghetti Westerns and the Wu-Tang Clan.

Continue Reading

Politics

How Meta’s antitrust case could dampen AI development

Published

on

By

How Meta’s antitrust case could dampen AI development

How Meta’s antitrust case could dampen AI development

Meta, the parent company of Facebook, Instagram, WhatsApp and Messenger, is facing antitrust proceedings that could limit its ability to develop AI amid a field of competitors.

First filed in 2021, the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) alleges that Meta’s strategy of absorbing firms — rather than competing with them — violates antitrust laws. If the court rules against Meta, it could be forced to spin out its various messenger services and social media sites into independent companies.

The loss of its stable of social media companies could harm Facebook’s competitiveness not only in the social media industry but also in its ability to train and develop its proprietary Llama AI models with data from those sites.

The trial could take anywhere from a couple of months to a year, but the outcome will have lasting consequences on Meta’s standing in the AI race.

Meta’s antitrust case and its effect on AI

The FTC first opened its complaint against Meta in 2020 when the firm was still operating as Facebook. The agency’s amended complaint a year later alleges that Meta (then Facebook) used an illegal “buy-or-bury” scheme on more creative competitors after its “failed attempts to develop innovative mobile features for its network.” This resulted in a monopoly of the “friends and family” social media market.

Meta founder and CEO Mark Zuckerberg had the chance to address these allegations on April 14, the first day of the official FTC v. Meta trial. He testified that only 20% of user content on Facebook and some 10% on Instagram was generated by users’ friends. The nature of social media has changed, Zuckerberg claimed.

“People just kept on engaging with more and more stuff that wasn’t what their friends were doing,” he said — meaning that the nature of Meta’s social media holdings was sufficiently diverse.

How Meta’s antitrust case could dampen AI development
The FTC alleges that Meta identified potential threat competitors and bought them up. Source: FTC

At the time of the FTC’s initial complaint, Meta called the allegations “revisionist history,” a claim it repeated on April 13 when it stated the agency was “ignoring reality.” The company has argued that the purchases of Instagram and WhatsApp have benefited users and that competition has appeared in the form of YouTube and TikTok. 

If the District of Columbia Circuit Court rules against Meta, the global social media giant will be forced to unwind these services into independent firms. Jasmine Enberg, vice president and principal analyst at eMarketer, told the Los Angeles Times that such a ruling could cost Meta its competitive edge in the social media market.

“Instagram really is its biggest growth driver, in the sense that it has been picking up the slack for Facebook for a long time, especially on the user front when it comes to young people,” said Enberg. “Facebook hasn’t been where the cool college kids hang out for a long time.”

Such a ruling would also affect the pool of data from which Meta can draw to train its AI models. In July 2024, Meta halted the rollout of AI models in the European Union, citing “regulatory uncertainty.” 

The pause came after privacy advocacy group None of Your Business filed complaints in 11 European countries against Meta’s use of public data from its platforms to train its AI models. The Irish Data Protection Commission subsequently ordered a pause on the practice until it could conduct a review. 

Related: Meta’s Llama 4 puts US back in lead to ‘win the AI race’ — David Sacks

On April 14, Meta got the go-ahead to use public data — i.e., posts and comments from adult users across all of its platforms — to train the model. If these firms dissolved into separate companies, with their own organizational structures and data protection policies and practices, Meta would be cut off from an ocean of data and human communication with which its AI could be improved. 

Andrew Rossow, a cyberspace attorney with Minc Law and CEO of AR Media Consulting, told Cointelegraph that in such an event, “companies would most likely control their own user data, and Meta would be restricted from using it unless new data-sharing agreements were negotiated, which would be subject to regulatory scrutiny and user/consumer privacy laws.”

However, Rossow noted that it wouldn’t be a total loss for Meta. Zuckerberg’s firm would retain the wealth of data from Facebook and Messenger. It could continue to use “opt-in” data from consumers who allow their posts to be used for AI training, and it could also employ synthetic data sets as well as third-party and open data.

Meta, the AI race and data protections

The race to unseat OpenAI and its ChatGPT model from AI dominance has grown more competitive in the last year as DeepSeek joined the fray and Meta launched the fourth iteration of its open-source Llama model. 

In addition to training new models, major AI development firms are investing billions in new data centers to accommodate new iterations. In January 2025, Meta announced the construction of a 2-gigawatt data center with more than 1.3 million Nvidia AI graphics processing units. 

Zuckerberg wrote in a post on Threads, “This will be a defining year for AI. In 2025, I expect Meta AI will be the leading assistant serving more than 1 billion people […] To power this, Meta is building a 2GW+ datacenter that is so large it would cover a significant part of Manhattan.”

How Meta’s antitrust case could dampen AI development
Illustration of the data map coverage. Source: Mark Zuckerberg

His announcement followed the $500-billion Stargate project, which would see massive investment in AI development led by OpenAI and SoftBank, with Microsoft and Oracle as equity partners. 

Related: Trump announces $500B AI infrastructure venture ‘Stargate’

Amid this competition, AI firms are looking for broader and more varied sources of data to train their AI models — and have turned to dubious practices in order to get the data they need. In order to stay competitive with OpenAI when developing its Llama 3 model, Meta harvested thousands of pirated books from the site LibGen. According to court documents in a case pending against Meta, Llama developers harvested data from pirated books because licensing them from sources like Scribd seemed “unreasonably expensive.” 

Time was another perceived motivator for using pirated works. “They take like 4+ weeks to deliver data,” one engineer wrote about services through which they could purchase book licenses.

The practice is not limited to Meta. OpenAI has also been accused of mining data from pirated work hosted on LibGen. 

Rossow suggested that, “to ensure lasting impact — beyond short-term profit,” Meta would do well to “prioritize investment in advanced data collection, rigorous auditing and the implementation of privacy-preserving and encryption-based technologies.”

By focusing on transparency and responsible practices, “Meta can continue to genuinely advance AI capabilities, rebuild and nurture long-term user trust, and adapt to evolving legal and ethical standards, regardless of changes to its platform portfolio.”

What a ruling for the FTC would mean

Litigation is now hitting tech firms from all sides as they face allegations of privacy violations, copyright law infringement and stifling competition. Major cases like those facing Google, Amazon and Meta that have yet to play out will decide how and whether these firms can proceed as they have, defining the guardrails for AI development as well. 

Rossow said that the current antitrust case against Meta could decide how courts interpret antitrust law for tech firms, spanning tech mergers, data usage and market competition. It would also signal that courts are “willing to break up tech conglomerates” when issues of smothering competition are involved, while at the same time, “taking current precedent a step further in harmonizing it with the laws of cyberspace.”

Magazine: Memecoin degeneracy is funding groundbreaking anti-aging research

Continue Reading

Politics

NHS must change policy on allowing trans people on single-sex wards, head of equalities watchdog says

Published

on

By

NHS must change policy on allowing trans people on single-sex wards, head of equalities watchdog says

The NHS must change its policy of allowing transgender people to be on single-sex wards aligned with their gender identity following the Supreme Court ruling on the definition of a “woman”, the head of Britain’s equalities watchdog said.

On Wednesday, judges at the UK’s highest court unanimously ruled that the definition of a “woman” and “sex” in the Equality Act 2010 refers to “a biological woman and biological sex”.

Baroness Kishwer Falkner, chair of the UK’s Equality and Human Rights Commission (EHRC), said the ruling was “enormously consequential” and ensured clarity.

Politics latest: Supreme Court ruling should ‘draw a line’ under debate

She vowed to pursue organisations that do not update their policies, saying they should be “taking care” to look at the “very readable judgment”.

On single-sex hospital wards, Baroness Falkner told BBC Radio 4’s Today programme the NHS will “have to change” their 2019 policy, which says transgender patients are entitled to be accommodated on single-sex wards matching how they identify.

She said the court ruling means there is now “no confusion” and the NHS “can start to implement the new legal reasoning and produce their exceptions forthwith”.

Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player

Gender ruling – How it happened

Women’s sport and changing rooms

The baroness also said trans women can no longer take part in women’s sport, while single-sex places, such as changing rooms, “must be based on biological sex”.

However, she said there is no law against organisations providing a “third space”, such as unisex toilets, and suggested trans rights organisations “should be using their powers of advocacy to ask for those third spaces”.

In 2021, Baroness Falkner came under criticism from trans and other LGBTIQ+ organisations after she said women had the right to question transgender identity without fear of abuse, stigmatisation or loss of employment.

Some EHRC staff resigned in protest of the body’s “descent into transphobia”, while others defended her, saying she was depoliticising the organisation. Her four-year term was extended for a further 12 months in November by the Labour government.

Public bodies must look at equality laws

Health minister Karin Smyth said public bodies have been told to look at how equality laws are implemented following the ruling.

She told Anna Jones on Sky News Breakfast: “Obviously, public bodies have been asked to look at their own guidance.

“And we will do that very, very carefully.”

She said the court’s ruling was “very clear” about women’s rights being defined by sex, which she said “will give clarity to companies”.

But she warned against public bodies making statements “that may alarm people”, telling them to take their time to look at their guidance.

The ruling marked the culmination of a long battle between campaign group For Women Scotland and the Scottish government after the group brought a case arguing sex-based protections should only apply to people born female.

Read more:
Feminists ‘feel braver about speaking out’

Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player

‘This ruling doesn’t affect trans people in the slightest’

Not a triumph of one group over another

Judge Lord Hodge said the ruling should not be read as “a triumph of one or more groups in our society at the expense of another”.

He said the Equality Act 2010 “gives transgender people protection, not only against discrimination through the protected characteristic of gender reassignment, but also against direct discrimination, indirect discrimination and harassment in substance in their acquired gender”.

Ms Smyth said those who identify as transgender “will feel concerned” after the ruling but said the Gender Recognition Act still stands and gives people who identify differently to the sex they were born in “the dignity and privacy of presenting differently”.

She said NHS policy of having same sex wards remains, but did not mention the 2019 transgender policy, and said the NHS has been looking at how to support both transgender men and women.

Scotland’s First Minister John Swinney said the Scottish government “accepts” the judgment and said the ruling “gives clarity”.

Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player

‘Today’s ruling only stokes the culture war further’

Trina Budge, director of For Women Scotland, said it was a “victory for women’s rights” and said the case was “never about trans rights” as transgender people are “fully protected in law”.

“It means there’s absolute clarity in law regarding what a woman is. We know for sure now that we are referring to the biological sex class of women,” she told Sky News.

“And that when we see a women-only space, it means exactly that. Just women. No men. Not even if they have a gender recognition certificate.”

Transgender woman and Scottish Greens activist Ellie Gomersall said the ruling “represents yet another attack on the rights of trans people to live our lives in peace”.

Scottish Greens MSP Maggie Chapman added: “This is a deeply concerning ruling for human rights and a huge blow to some of the most marginalised people in our society.”

LGBT charity Stonewall said there was “deep concern” around the consequences of the ruling.

Continue Reading

Politics

Polygon’s Nailwal: Jio partnership to drive real-world Web3 adoption for 450M users

Published

on

By

Polygon’s Nailwal: Jio partnership to drive real-world Web3 adoption for 450M users

Polygon’s Nailwal: Jio partnership to drive real-world Web3 adoption for 450M users

As Polygon lays the groundwork for mainstream Web3 adoption in India by bringing blockchain access to over 450 million Reliance Jio users, it remains focused on balancing speed, scalability and affordability, without compromising on decentralization.

Polygon is working with Jio, a telecom giant owned by India’s richest man, Mukesh Ambani, to find ways to infuse blockchain technology into its existing services. The duo is currently adding blockchain-based capabilities to the JioSphere web browser, which would have been expensive, cumbersome and time-consuming via traditional methods.

“We’re building at an insane pace, onboarding massive partners, and pushing blockchain into the mainstream, but with that growth comes the responsibility to make sure we’re doing it the right way,” Polygon’s co-founder, Sandeep Nailwal, said while discussing Polygon’s India-focused initiatives with Cointelegraph. 

Preserving decentralization while ensuring system scalability

“Scalability and decentralization don’t have to be either-or, and that’s exactly the balance we’re focused on at Polygon,” Nailwal said as he underscored the importance of keeping the core values of blockchain intact: security, transparency and decentralization.

At the same time, Nailwal revealed that Polygon is investing heavily in zero-knowledge technology to make scaling more seamless across the ecosystem. “The goal is to give developers and users the best of both worlds: faster, cheaper transactions without compromising trust or decentralization,” he added.

As a result of delivering the combination of low fees, fast transactions and decentralized security, Polygon is already powering some of the most active use cases in Web3, from stablecoin payments on Polygon PoS to real-world tokenization with major institutions: 

“The key challenge is making blockchain as seamless and accessible as Web2 without compromising what makes it special. That’s why we’re all-in on ZK technology and Agglayer, which let us scale while keeping the ecosystem trustless and interoperable.”

Bringing blockchain tech to millions of users

According to Nailwal, a one-size-fits-all approach does not work when onboarding 450 million users from India’s diverse population. “We’ll be working closely with Jio to develop use cases that truly resonate with their users, and gradually onboard them onto the chain based on these real-world applications,” he added.

Nailwal said that developers never have to compromise on the fundamentals, as Polygon’s infrastructure can scale without sacrificing what makes blockchain powerful in the first place:

“What excites me most is that we’re moving beyond technical discussions about blockchain to solving real problems for real people. These are the use cases that will drive the next wave of adoption.”

“At the end of the day, it’s about more than just technology. We’re here to create a decentralized future that billions of people can actually use. And while that’s a massive challenge, it’s also what excites me the most,” Nailwal said.

Related: Indian town adopts Avalanche blockchain for tamper-proof land records

Real-world problem solving will drive the next wave of adoption

Rising threats driven by artificial intelligence tools, including deepfakes and other misinformation campaigns, are another use case blockchain technology can help solve. Nailwal said that the escalating threat of misinformation and growing consumer insistence on trusted sources will eventually result in an uptick of blockchain-based verification tools.

Additionally, Nailwal highlighted the growing relevance of Polymarket, a cryptocurrency-based prediction market, in mainstream finance and reporting. “Polymarket’s success is exactly what we’ve been working toward,” he said, adding:

“Prediction markets are proving to be incredibly valuable tools for finance, risk assessment, journalism and even governance. They pull in insights from a wide range of sources, often making them more reliable than traditional polling.”

Nailwal is placing his full bet on blockchain’s immutable nature to transform economic forecasting, policy-making and journalism, among others.

Magazine: Your AI ‘digital twin’ can take meetings and comfort your loved ones

Continue Reading

Trending