In defense of Dom and the Dfinity team - There is a future for the Internet Computer

(This post was in no way sponsored by Dfinity in any way, shape, or form)

I’m a lurker who finally made an account today. I’ve thought of posting this for a little while now, and honestly have wondered what the benefits of writing a post as a nobody online would actually be. What’s the benefit of a random guy on the internet defending a bunch of smart developers on an online forum? Well, I’m a man of action - so here I am.

Lately, there’s been a lot of posts going after the Dfinity team in a negative way again - this time it’s not about the initial launch - it’s about Dom and his leadership style, and it’s also about how the Dfinity team ‘overlooks’ key issues that the community is trying to raise - people feel unheard. Add in the SNS-1 launch (which I was unable to get anything in myself!), a bear market, and the delays to Bitcoin integration - and it’s easy to see why there’s a lot of criticism.

To these critics: you really don’t have much of an idea how to create a quality product. You gotta look at the macro. Blockchain’s an overused concept that we can apply to anything in the crypto world - it’s great, but it’s not the future because it’s right here in the present. When you want to build a successful product, you have to innovate beyond the capabilities of your competition. Trial and error. This is only the first year, and it looks like Dfinity isn’t going anywhere yet in terms of solvency.

There is no chain like the Internet Computer. Every version of the Internet that has emerged nowadays has been in a centralized form. From its original creation by the U.S. military, the Internet as it currently stands operates in a pseudo-decentralized model. Each website and service makes use of a centralized service (a web provider) in order to create individual apps and host websites. Sometimes, it is possible to host your own server to avoid these services, but even that backend runs on a centralized platform - like AWS.

Bitcoin cut out the middleman for making transactions. Ethereum cut out the middleman for banking and non-monetary/service based transactions. The Internet Computer takes out the biggest middleman of them all - web providers. Decentralizing the Internet will lead into the very redefining of traditional property rights and ‘tangibility’ - as NFT images and tokens really don’t present a good case for this. But emails such as those on the Dmail platform? That’s a much stronger case to be made for digital property. Where am I going with all this macro?

Most companies that succeed in massive innovation usually have one or two people driving the show forward. They have an idea, usually coming with a lot of uncertainty and risk, and many of them fail. Even good ideas fail simply because they might not be feasible. Dom had an idea and got the people together to make an attempt at this… and it’s mostly succeeded. It’s also managed to scare almost every other major crypto developer out there because Chain-key cryptography makes Layering and Oracles obsolete. Scale can be achieved directly in the network - this is massive!

People send money once or twice a day. The same goes for non-monetary/service based transactions. But, everyone uses the Internet all the time. What the devs here realized is that you can apply the same middleman logic to the internet; that’s the operating philosophy of the Internet Computer. This is a massive step forward into making decentralized technology plausible with use-cases for the average person. For example, imagine a phone OS built on this system, it could actually work! Because the system runs its own backend, there’s literally no middlemen except for the node providers and participants - the point of the token is to be used for the network and for governance.

Dom and Dfinity have faced a lot of backlash, and a lot of people who’ve tried to kill their tech because there’s nothing like it. The concept is extremely ambitious. If this is the next step in webtech, it makes sense why a lot of notable coders and experienced web developers work for Dfinity. They’ve been quiet because they’re quite aware of what they’re building - and the risk that is involved with that. Dom’s a visionary. That doesn’t mean he doesn’t make mistakes, or that Dfinity will succeed in making this project succeed in the middle of a bear market. But his top down approach more then likely is the reason why Dfinity has been able to move forward to begin with, and I don’t think he gets enough credit. To him, he’s just working every day to build his vision and he doesn’t care about what online critics say.

We as a community need to work on more constructive criticism. A lot of people on this forum do in fact give pretty constructive criticism when it comes to tech complaints, but then devolve immediately into blaming Dfinity for not fixing an existing issue. Yes, the little technical issues do matter - especially like the SNS-1 launch, it was a disappointment for a lot of people. Yes, price action does matter - but building a tech platform comes first - Amazon’s major revenues come from AWS, but it cost a lot of money and took years to get AWS up and running to begin with. Measure progress in years, not months. If Dfinity doesn’t get crushed by the bear market and is able to weather a new recession, I think this tech will take off and go sky high in terms of it’s value add down the road.

Now - besides the praise, here’s my formal suggestions for the future to make this project succeed.

  1. I see a lot about web3. I’m not a coder, but is it possible to integrate existing Web2 architecture - and if so, why can’t we try to get existing projects and services to migrate over? Blockchain could help make their websites more secure, and in a world where getting Ddos attacked seems to be pretty commonplace, cheap server data and architecture on the Internet Computer with a great security architecture could prove very attractive. If this is already possible, why isn’t it being marketed at all? Is something like Python and direct-html calling possible?

  2. Be more active in trying to market the product. For example - despite the flak this takes on r/cryptocurrency, doing an AMA on several notable outlets would bring a lot of attention not just to investors (as a lot of people do care about price action, admittently me too) - but a well-known name brings more developers in.

  3. Develop a no-code canister solution which can allow a user to do some basic dapp development and architecture without having to learn Motoko.

  4. Dfinity, unlike most developer groups, is actually really active in dealing with their developers and marketing their apps, and even in admitting mistakes. It takes time to grow a network. But, Dfinity should focus on identifying competitors and trying to make a case to outsiders as to why they should host on ICP rather than existing AWS architecture. The tech is great - but the tech isn’t helpful if no one knows about it.

  5. I know what’s currently needed to run a node. Make a ‘light’ version of that available to the average consumer who may want to host a node. Decentralizing the network even further allows more users to participate in the network. I know we have to vote on adding new nodes - there would have to be a vetting process, and that sparks a larger discussion - dm me if you want my ideas on this, as this post is already far too long.

  6. ICP. Whether it’s ‘Insane Clown Posse’ or ‘I see pee’, this ticker isn’t very helpful. The name ‘Internet Computer’ works. It’s the ticker - I have told several people about this project in person, and got a laugh each time - no one could take it seriously. Maybe $TIC for The Internet Computer? Sure, people might think the comparison is funny, but in the business world - if your product looks like a joke, it’s hard to get investors.

  7. Help guide developers to migrate their apps to phones, and maybe even initiate a NNS proposal to bring the NNS to mobile as an app. This would DRASTICALLY increase the user base. If Openchat and Dmail had iPhone apps, I’d use them all day over Snapchat and my built-in email.

  8. Most importantly of all, please send me a SNS-1 token as I really wanted to participate in governance and couldn’t buy it! (Insert crying emoji here)

I’m a big believer that if you have a great product, the one mistake that it’s easy to make is to focus purely on marketing the tech while forgetting the benefit of simplicity - especially for a product like this. I know, all things considered, it’s only the first year and so much growth has already happened. But a few tweaks for marketing and for helping guide existing and new developers to the network would increase user generation and use.

If you made it this far, I’d love to hear your thoughts!


Good to a list in which it’s not just about piling on the foundation. That’s not say people don’t have valid reasons to be upset though.

This is the way. Constructive feedback as opposed to whining/attacking/demeaning.


I 100% agree with this. It’s kind of upsetting to see these frustrations taken out on the devs. I feel like cryptocurrency (yes I know many people hate this term) has just become so toxic. A lot of people don’t understand the first thing about development especially when you are in uncharted waters like blockchain and more specifically with what ICP is doing. It’s not like there’s just a simple solution to every single problem and the devs just need to take a few minutes to fix it. Again I will reiterate, these are uncharted waters and most of the things that ICP is doing has never been done before. This requires tons of research and development and trial and error. I completely agree that there should be feedback and critiques. But complaining about deadlines and complaining every single time something bad happens will do NOTHING. If YOU do not know the EXACT solution yourself, then don’t complain. Do you people not understand what ICP is doing? They are doing something that has NEVER been done before. They aren’t just a simple blockchain. If they succeed, they WILL change the WORLD. People always talk about how blockchain is censorship-resistant and that is FALSE. ICP is the only blockchain that can (I’m not convinced they are at this point YET because they truly haven’t been put to the test yet) be censorship resistant if they succeed. In conclusion, I would just hope that people who have critiques can relax and really just contribute to the community with a genuine and honest critique rather than be irrational because the price of ICP is not where they want it to be or because they missed out on an SNS sale.


Well said, @Jman and @ewebb6. I’ve come to the conclusion that crypto enthusiasts are almost universally ignorant of what is actually required to build an enterprise software application, let alone the first World Computer. All other blockchains are obsessing over what amounts to little more than a 4 or 5-column spreadsheet table replicated over many computers to track nothing more than the allocation of a token pool (or single asset/NFT) across multiple wallet addresses. Adding “smart contract” functionality to this 4 or 5-column table can only make that one tiny table so much “smarter”.

In other words, these other blockchains do little more than mimic an accounting system’s general ledger of debits and credits, with a running trial balance equal to the cumulative total of debits and credits denominated in a token. As a result, other blockchains are honestly like child’s play compared to what is actually required to recreate the entire IT stack (and universal internet identities) on blockchain technology. This is why the IC is truly the only Level 0 blockchain in existence, and thus the only true Web3 platform as well.

From the point of view of an enterprise software developer who is also a long-term investor, the massive investment and diverse brain trust required to recreate the entire IT stack on a single, high performance, scalable blockchain is not at all a surprise. Nor is this unprecedented investment and timescale even a negative. In fact, it is arguably an extremely positive feature. It is the ultimate moat (to use a Warren Buffet term) against future competition given how wide and deep that moat clearly is. No one else is remotely attempting to accomplish this ambitious feat. And no one will likely do so anytime soon after this crypto winter and its DeFi/NFT implosion. That means the IC effectively has a 5-7 year lead time (min.) over anyone who wants to start a competing blockchain project like this in the future.

That is how someone should think about the IC when they have studied or have extensive experience in both long term investing and enterprise software development. Unfortunately, there are no shortcuts to building software as complex as the first World Computer. The IC is the only blockchain currently capable of being the orchestration Layer 0 for all of Web3. To achieve the true vision and decentralization benefits of blockchain, even one point of centralization exposure creates an unacceptable single point of failure. That necessitates a very high bar for success, and it significantly increases the required effort to get there. So have patience.

By stark contrast, from a crypto trader’s point of view, this extended development and deployment timescale to build the IC is a sign of utter, catastrophic failure, as he buys, sells and “DeFi’s” all his tokens like a monkey on cocaine. Any other “successful” blockchain would have all kinds of “applications” (i.e., debit/credit token trackers) already built with this amount of time and money. By this point, other blockchains’ falsely labeled “dApps” (built almost entirely on centralized Web2 platforms) would have already “succeeded” in building a mountain – or rather, massive pyramid – of end users on their blockchain network. Never mind that the only real purpose of this “network” is to track all those tokens churning amongst themselves. The more a token churns, the greater the perceived value of that token, since almost all token value (excl. BTC) is based entirely on a “gas fee” cut of each debit and credit on that tiny little table. Circular logic thus leads to circular “value creation”.

Of course, there’s just one big problem with this frenzy of debits and credits on all those 4 or 5-column tables, as we are now seeing play out in real time. All those tokens generally have no fundamental value or utility on their own. Moreover, all those “DeFi” transactions beyond boring swaps are not even remotely decentralized. Nor are they ultimately “financing” anything in the real world beyond a Ponzinomic pyramid scheme of churning tokens.


Do you have a twitter? I might follow it kek

I have a personal Twitter, but I don’t post on it too much. Still if you want to follow me, send me a DM

You’re completely right @Sabr.

For instance, I see a lot of people on here complaining about tokenomics and how ‘it’s not too much to ask about the price and finding a balance’. Like - this chain is almost only a year old. And I believe Dfinity doesn’t talk much about price because at this early stage, because to get adopters - cheap data is required to launch canisters and that’s literally what the token is for. How else do you get more people to build on-chain? Building the network is far more important than retail investors who are hoping to make a quick buck, or brokers like FTX who manipulated the price. I think @dominicwilliams called the gas model ‘Proof of Useful Work’ as a result - the token literally propels the network forward in several ways; governance through staking, deployment of canisters on it’s own system, deployment of nodes on it’s own system, deployment of tokens, and conversion to different tokens through wrapping on it’s own system. Dfinity is hoping that this World Computer can be a backend which rivals AWS in scale and because of it’s distributed ledger& node format (the crypto element), it will be rendered almost immune to bad actors from outside the chain. If it does grow enough, it will be able to catch AWS with enough node support. I personally believe this can’t be achieved without getting smaller ‘light’ nodes up and running as I mentioned above - but that’s just my opinion. ICP goes beyond what most people talk about in crypto because it’s the next generation of the crypto/fintech world; Bitcoin was under everyone’s radar for a long time too! Patience is everything, and as an investor - holding for the long haul is the move here. Yes, it’s ambitious - and yes there’s always a chance it could fail. That’s any investment. You don’t make huge returns by investing into a low-risk portfolio.

On a sidenote, the most hilarious thing, I think, about most crypto tokens and ‘investors’ is that the whole point of Bitcoin was to create peer-to-peer exchanges without a middleman needed, and yet 99% of people buy Bitcoin or UST/etc to convert to Bitcoin off of a centralized exchange so they can act as a middleman (investor) to sell to someone else who thinks the price will go up further! It’s such a bunch of hypocrisy! I’m in this for the tech - not for the value of the ‘token’.


Check out the “Badlands” proposal, which I think Dom and others want to revive as an optional consensus layer option at the mobile phone level (for certain canister types), if I understand this concept correctly. Also, check out DFINITY’s ideas around even more decentralized apps called “wApps” (wallet apps), which will definitely be coming out on the IC per Dom’s recent tweet and which no other blockchain will be able to replicate.

Bitcoin will perpetually be a special case, at least until CBDCs become just as secure and mainstream or enough countries ban bitcoin mining. It will never really have much currency value on its own, since its time to finalize a transaction (10+ minutes) is far too slow to ever be practical. Nor will it have any utility value on its own, since it will always be a dumb coin without any smart contract capability. Its inherent value is mainly in risk reduction (i.e., like an insurance premium) as the most proven and secure place to park one’s crypto investment after exiting all other higher risk tokens, or to get some basic correlated exposure to the crypto industry for portfolio diversification. It’s also the only accepted crypto commodity by the IRS (i.e., not a “security”), which again makes it attractive for parking crypto. Therefore, I strongly agree with you that combining bitcoin with a centralized exchange is a very bad and hypocritical idea, since doing so essentially destroys the core insurance value of holding bitcoin in the first place.


No personal twitter yet. I used to have one unrelated to Web3, but I got banned by bots for getting too many people upset in debates. Twitter has become a cesspool of self-gratifying and self-reinforcing echo chambers, at least when it comes to any topics connected with social, economic, political or religious controversy. Web3 is a bit different, though, given its more neutral, information-driven focus. So I might consider a new personal ID on the IC version of Twitter once it gets sufficient critical mass or formally launches as an SNS.

1 Like

Re: 3 - check out for no code building on the IC. Let us know what what you’d like to build! :slight_smile:


Hoping my quotes work correctly here. Badlands sounds exactly what I’m talking about here - I just haven’t found any clear documentation on what it actually will look like - since ideas are floating around right now. But wApps seem like a great concept! Classic Dom making breakthrough tech!

This looks incredible! I’ll have to figure out what I’d want to build - but this is exactly what I was looking for.


Blockspace costs the same regardless of the price of the token. It is paid in cycles - and 1 Trillion cycles always equal 1 XDR. So the price of ICP to build dapps is irrelevant. You can start building canisters for 5$ even if the price of ICP was $100,000.

The question that’s been on my mind for a while now is - if ICP is so great, why aren’t Ethereum maximalists talking about it? ICP provides a 1000x better smart contract functionality and L2 functionality compared to any other alternate blockchains.

Turns out seasoned crypto investors don’t like Proof of Stake models where the governance could make literally any changes to the protocol overnight.

ICP is a hybrid of proof of stake. We don’t have a traditional slashing mechanism where the validators / node providers stake tokens to provide their hardware for computing and validating.

Proof of useful work has its advantages, but it is not permissionless. ICP hardware are expensive - so adds one more barrier for node providers.

1 Like

You onboard developers. You promote projects that are building. You create content and teach people about ICP tech. You show that you care about web3 values. You adhere to them. You act more like a non-profit organization and less like a company. You collaborate with the entire community and not just favoring one Network of “ENTREPRENEURS” and venture capitalists.

Shilling the same NFT ~marketplace~ Launchpad and its friends are web2 bs that happens behind the scenes. It’s all silly politics that web3 builders hate. Web3 builders literally want the opposite of the status quo, and that is why they choose to build on the blockchain.

Hosting something fully on-chain does not make it decentralized if the blockchain network itself is semi-permissioned. It just provides opportunities for better ownership compared to cloud services. But if the smart contract architecture is very centralized → built like a web2 service → not immutable, not an open distributed protocol - not permissionless, etc, it doesn’t make sense to call them decentralized just because its hosted entirely on chain. There are still massive trust components involved that are being abused like in web2 systems.

Instead of Plug and Play smart contracts, its P and Pay right now.

There are hundreds of other products building and struggling to acquire new users. Instead, we got a Launchpad that did $30 + Mill USD volume till now, running on speculation.

Many of the dapps wait on DFINITY to deliver their roadmap promises in time. I bet many developers were incredibly disappointed at the SNS-1 execution. There were some serious shortcomings - which made the chain / dapp unusable.

Users couldn’t participate in an auction sale on a blockchain that wants to reimagine the internet on-chain. No anti-botting measures, no solutions for double-spending, and the UI gave error 503 the whole time.

meanwhile, bots bought SNS-1 tokens via CLI. And I suspect many of the insiders and users did the same - those that knew about SNS-1 launch in detail.

Many genuine developers and builders were frustrated with this type of execution by dfinity, so they spoke out. Instead of taking up responsibility for their fuck ups, DFINITY engages in blame-shifting and changing narratives to downplay the said fuck ups.

This further damages the trust we place in DFINITY. We must trust DFINITY on IC because they created the chain and are the only major contributor to the ICP blockchain.


DFINITY is not your friend or your enemy. DFINITY is a non-profit organization that contributes to the development of Internet Computer Blockchain, and it should focus on the protocol, not on the applications. No other reason to focus on specific applications unless you have a backdoor deal with them and their networks. It seems some DFINITY employees don’t understand jack shit about web3 or crypto networks in general. Seem like incredibly inexperienced, as pointed out by a post here

Also, if you pay developers 30 ICP for sharing research they took a month to compile - it just reflects on you (DFINITY) poorly. That’s why no one experienced wants to contribute WITH you.

30 ICP now is = less than $150.

That being said, I am a believer in blockchain singularity, and I believe ICP has the potential to disrupt the internet and become the defacto compute layer for the public internet of the world. But if you do not hold DFINITY accountable for the things it does and the way it does, then one day, it might be too late to do so.


I would much rather have statistically decentralized + permissioned than massively decentralized and permissionless when it comes to node providers storing IC data and running IC applications. To understand why, just ask yourself some common sense questions. How would you propose, exactly, for a legion of cell phones to host enterprise scale web applications on the IC? What do you think the performance/latency would be if millions or billions of end users on cell phones and laptops were querying and updating data stored on millions of other cell phones and laptops? Also, how could grandma’s cell phone or laptop store and run blockchain-based databases, web servers, enterprise applications, etc. at web speed, and what if her Wifi or cell service became patchy while providing all those IC hosting services?

It is easy to talk idealistically about massive, permissionless decentralization when all you care about is updating a primitive little Bitcoin or Ethereum spreadsheet table 4-5 columns wide, especially when you are willing to wait several minutes just to add one tiny little row onto that spreadsheet. It is quite another to run an entire IT stack on the blockchain at web speed, while also having a reliable way (with consistent, high performance hardware and internet connectivity) to monitor statistical deviations from consensus in order to block unreliable node providers from the network.

Sure, there are only 81 IC node providers right now, and that is not yet statistically sufficient. However, as the IC becomes more successful and grows exponentially, this becomes a self-correcting problem. Statistically significant decentralization will increase exponentially in proportion to that growth. Arguably, Ethereum is even less decentralized than the IC given its excessive reliance on Web2 hosting behemoths like AWS and Azure, which has already allowed the U.S. government to gain coercive censorship control over the network – and with surprising ease, I might add (e.g., Tornado cash).


Anybody who’s still an Ethereum maximalist is probably similar to a Bitcoin Maximalist in 2015. Just didn’t get the memo, or if they did get it, they didn’t understand it.


First i would like yo commend you @JMan for this wonderful right up, truth be said a whole lot of things have happened to the IC even from lunch.

my twitter:

the real issue im having with critics is the fact where they dont talk from the development side of things, they just want return on their less than 20k usd investments. awhole lot of useful tools are being developed by the IC but they are too blind or too concentrated on money to see the usefulness, they all just want their $1000 to become $100,000 over night, thats why chains without real utility and VN funding keep stealing their money daily.

Truth be said, the ambition of Dfinity is really a large one for the IC project, but the ultimate question is have they not been delivering ?. most devs on twitter said the ICP<>BTC integration was impossible, but here it is today even less than 2 years of IC lunch, yet they dont see anything to be proud of about the IC, we even already have HTTP outcalls.


Some blockchain have long existed before the IC, why have they not done everything different or even better than the has done in less than 2 years.

They keep comparing the IC to AWS, but they fail to state the amount of years AWS has been in existence (2006), and you expect a tech that was lunched 2021 to beat that overnight?, they made mistakes at AWS also but they kept building, thats why most of us can boast and use their services daily.

Sometimes i do wonder if people know how much the companies make when they sell their data?, or how much security leaks they have to deal with?, NOW IC is here to eradicate all that and even make it better, yet no one is giving them their flowers, thats really not right.

Fun Fact: The IC will always improve thats why there is a word called “UPGRADING”, let the “DEVS BUILD”.

About the SNS-1, the team categorically stated it was a test, people just had too many high hopes, tests are done to make things better, cause it has issues does not mean it was not a successful one. its also had a limited supply so in contest not even one could eventually get it, now we talk about the Dfinity team what about other users like us who dim it fit to use bots for the purchase of tokens, some who dont have bots opened extra nns accounts to buy also, is that the teams fault also?

the truth here is no one is left out in the blaming department, we just have to keep working to make things better, cause perfect is impossible.

Point 6- you spoke about the name “ICP”, i would tell you the name is not actually the issue, Apple was once a funny name for a company, but see the amount of assets it controls today, it takes time to understand something, when they actually do the name would make more meaning to them.

point 8- i could send you an SNS token when mine gets unlocked, if thats fine by you.

my twitter:

if you made it thus far youre blessed lol
Bless DFINITY and IC Community for trying to be DIFFERENT!.


ETH maxis are definitely talking about ICP. Nobody will let Chainlink die that easily though - too much money at “stake”. :slight_smile:

1 Like

Dibs on that juicy sns token if no takers