Brandon Donnelly

Daily insights for city builders, delivered every morning at 6 AM ET. I’m Brandon Donnelly — a Toronto-based real estate developer and founder of Globizen. I’ve been writing here since 2013.

Subscribe

Tag: blockchain

  • Decentralization and public infrastructure

    Decentralization, in the crypto/blockchain/web3 sense of the word, is a crucial thing. Here is an excellent article talking about why it is the key innovation of blockchain technology and why it is a central feature in this new emerging web3 world.

    But of course, it can all get very complicated. So I thought this — and in particular the sentence in bold below — was a good way of describing the benefits:

    “…decentralization enables web3 systems to be credibly neutral (they cannot discriminate against any individual stakeholder or any group of stakeholders, which is critical to incentivize developers to build within ecosystems) and composable (to mix and match software components like Lego bricks). As a result, web3 systems function more like public infrastructure than proprietary technology platforms. In contrast to the gated software of Web2, web3 protocols provide decentralized internet infrastructure on which anybody can build and create an internet business. Crucially, in web3, this can be done without the permission of the original deployer of the protocol or the need to use a centrally controlled interface.“

    This resonated with me because think about how important public infrastructure is to our cities. Most of us take it for granted that, when we need it, we can just plug in and access electricity, water, sewer, and other public infrastructure.

    But throughout history, these services have been fundamental to the growth of our cities. They empowered scale and better health outcomes, among other things. So it’s exciting to think that we are now living through the creation of something kind of similar in tech.

    Image: a16z

  • Money as social construct

    In Matt Levine’s latest Money Stuff newsletter he talks about how money is really just a social construct. In his words, money is “a way to keep track of what society thinks you deserve in terms of goods and services.”

    But over the years, we have learned that it can be manipulated through the actions of central banks and other authorities. This, he argues, has become more obvious in the last 15 or so years. Which is one of the reasons why people continue to argue that cryptocurrencies are both a good thing and something we need more of.

    Crypto is neutral, or at least that is the intent. But at the same time, it too remains a social construct. Cryptocurrencies have value because that is what we have collectively decided to layer on top of their math-based blockchains — a global market cap of nearly $2 trillion.

    Ironically, the more value we ascribe to them the less neutral they are likely to become. Because the more they ingratiate themselves into mainstream society, the more likely they are to get regulated. But Matt’s overarching argument is that this is in fact a good thing.

    Monies exist through webs of interdependencies that generally keeps us all in check by encouraging “prosocial behavior.” So the fact that authorities can intervene, when needed, isn’t a bug, it is a feature. It means that when you clearly misbehave, the world can punish you by doing things like freezing your foreign reserves.

  • Of course, Nike buys digital sneaker company

    This week it was announced that Nike has acquired RTFKT Studios (pronounced “artifact”) for an undisclosed amount. When I read the news (official Nike announcement here), I immediately thought to myself, “Yeah, of course!”

    Some of you may remember that I wrote about RTFKT back in April. They are perhaps best known for their digital sneaker NFTs (on the Ethereum blockchain). And so this is an exceedingly obvious and strategic buy for Nike.

    But more importantly, I think this is great validation for the crypto/NFT space and further evidence that our digital and physical worlds are continuing to collide in some new and very interesting ways.

    What this ultimately means for life in 10 or 20 years is anybody’s guess, but sneakers are the tip of the iceberg. And this doesn’t necessarily mean that we’re all destined to live in some sort of metaverse video game.

    Another way to look at this whole metaverse thing is to consider it not as an actual place or space, but instead as a moment in time (Shaan Puri makes this argument here). Put differently, the metaverse is simply a point in time where we begin to bestow tremendous value on our digital life and our digital assets.

    Instagram is one example of this. Profiles have become integral to people’s identifies. We use them to vet restaurants. We use them to vet travel destinations. And we use them to vet potential dating partners, among many other things.

    So while sneaker NFTs might be a new thing, there’s already lots of evidence that digital goods can have just as much value — and potentially even more value — than physical goods. I am sure that Nike recognizes this and it’s part of why they bought RTFKT.

  • Crypto energy consumption

    One of the main criticisms of cryptocurrencies is that they consume a lot of energy and are therefore not sustainable. But all blockchains are not created equal and there are different ways in which transactions on a blockchain can be validated.

    Bitcoin and Ethereum use something known as “proof of work” (though Ethereum plans to change this sometime next year). This method of validation does indeed use quite a bit of energy.

    But another way to validate and maintain security on a network is through something known as “proof of stake.” This is what Solana and many other blockchains are now using. Put differently, there’s no “mining” required, which is the work that is so energy intensive.

    To demonstrate the difference, the Solana Foundation recently published this comparison chart:

    To try and further put this into context, the entire Solana network is currently doing about 20 million transactions per year. Right now, they are claiming that this is equivalent to the electricity usage of about 986 American households.

    If you’d like to take a look at the footnotes, click here.

  • Decentralization, centralization, and new frontiers

    In this recent post by Naval Ravikant, he argues that innovation seems to like two things: decentralization and a frontier. He starts by giving the examples of more decentralized states (i.e. smaller federal governments) and the Wild West. The American frontier was, as you know, wild. But it was also a place of great innovation.

    Naval then goes on to talk about the pendulum that tends to swing between centralization and decentralization. And in the world of technology, the last decade has been one of centralization (big companies). But this pendulum is much broader. Cities, as we have talked about before on this blog, are constantly in tension between centralizing and decentralizing forces.

    COVID was a powerful decentralizing force for cities. Everything was closed and we were all supposed to stay home. And so most/all of the benefits of centralizing in a city were suddenly, yet temporarily, turned off. Many people naturally decentralized. But when the dust finally settles, I highly doubt it will be as dramatic as most people initially thought.

    We know that cities and urban density encourage innovation. That’s why “unicorns” tend to overwhelmingly originate in big cities. But here’s the thing: this is a form of centralization. The fact that cities even exist in the first place tells us that their centralizing forces are winning out over the decentralizing ones.

    So how do we reconcile this with Naval’s argument that new frontiers and decentralization are actually what are needed for innovation? I agree wholeheartedly that one of the key innovations with crypto, for example, is that it is decentralized and permissionless. But what does this ultimately mean for cities and our built form?

    Does it encourage a similar sort of decentralization to happen? Or is the irony that decentralized technologies actually still thrive in centralized urban places? We may all be online buying NFTs, but we still want to get together in person to show them off and exchange ideas.

  • The real smart city is going to be a crypto city

    Vitalik Buterin — who is best known as the cofounder of Ethereum — recently penned this post on his blog where he argues that “crypto cities broadly are an idea whose time has come.” (Credit to Shamez Virani for sending the post to me this morning.) There has been a lot of discussion over the years about the rise of smart cities. I for one am not really sure what that means besides the fact that it sounds good and it likely involves a bunch of tech and data collection. But maybe crypto can help.

    What Vitalik argues in his post is that we are now at a point in time where blockchain technologies have the opportunity to do two things for cities. One, we can take existing systems and processes and use blockchains to make them more “trusted, transparent, and verifiable.” That would be a very good thing. But the more interesting one is number two. We have the opportunity to use blockchains to create radically new forms of asset ownership (land and other scarce assets) and municipal governance.

    One specific example is that of a “city coin”, which cities like Miami are already experimenting with. Supposedly they are one of the first, which of course aligns with Mayor Suarez’s vision to position Miami as a preeminent tech and crypto hub. Though as Vitalik points out in his post, it’s important to maintain some optionality, especially since we are still very much in the early innings of this new frontier. (This recent episode on the Tim Ferriss Show had a great analogy in saying that the anthem at the beginning of the game isn’t even over yet.)

    So how might a “city coin” living on a blockchain work?

    Well let’s imagine that there are incentives in place for all of us who live in Toronto to own the Toronto coin (there’s still time to come up with a better name). You need it to pay your property taxes, you need it to pay for parking, and you need it to vote in the next election, among many other things. So there’s an incentive to buy and hold it if you’re a resident of this great city, but there is far less incentive to hold it if you don’t live here. (Maybe you own a bit of it because you’re a frequent visitor and/or your relatives live here.)

    One of the interesting things about something like this is that it would immediately create economic alignment. Now all of a sudden, everyone who lives in Toronto and owns Toronto coin would have a vested interest in seeing Toronto thrive. At the very least they would want to see the coin hold its value and ideally they would hope to see it appreciate.

    At the same time, the Toronto coin could be used for all sorts of governance matters. Take for example, land use and zoning decisions. What if we set things up such that these decisions weren’t made by the people who show up to community meetings in the basement of their local church but that they were instead made by everyone who holds the Toronto coin? i.e. The entire city, all of whom are, in a way, equity holders.

    In theory we could do this kind of voting today. However, part of the problem is that the economic alignment isn’t there without something like a Toronto coin. Right now a big part of the economic incentive rests with homeownership. If I own a home and a new development is proposed next to me, I am incentivized to do whatever it takes to selfishly maximize my own individual outcomes. And if that means no development and no more homes for people, then so be it.

    But what if we all had part of our net worth tied up in the Toronto coin? And what if when housing supply did not meet housing demand, the value of our coins dropped because it meant fewer residents (less demand for Toronto coin) and more people voting with their feet and moving to other geographies (more demand for some other coin)? This is one of the things about the crypto space. It turns everyone into evangelists because there are now strong economic incentives to be that way.

    Who knows if this is the way that things will actually play out. But it is part of the promise of crypto and it is not some pipe dream. It is already starting to take hold around the world and in the US in places like Wyoming and Colorado. For more on this topic, make sure to check out Vitalik’s full blog post.

  • Innovation in real estate development

    I am moderating a panel at the Toronto Real Estate Forum later this year (it’s on December 2 to be exact). The topic is innovation in development. There is a great panel of speakers (more info here) and the plan right now is to cover everything from new design and construction approaches to the rise of crypto and blockchains. Topics that are all near and dear to this blog.

    But we are still in the early stages of planning and I haven’t yet figured out what the questions to the panel will be. So I thought it would be interesting to hear from all of you: What would you say are the most important topics to cover when it comes to innovation in development? What’s next for our industry, or what should be next for our industry?

    If you have any thoughts, please leave a comment below. That way everyone can see them. Supposedly this is one of the most asked for topics at the real estate forum, and so it’s clearly top of mind for many people.

  • There is no effort without error and shortcoming

    I had a blog post planned out in my mind for today. I was going to write about how the Penthouse Collection launch went this evening at One Delisle (our new website just went live), and the digital NFT art (by Petra Cortright) that we commissioned to accompany each of the 8 penthouse residences.

    But then my partner Lucas Manuel sent out the below quote by Theodore Roosevelt in one of our group chats and it derailed everything. I think it’s imperative that it gets reshared here immediately:

    It is not the critic who counts; not the man who points out how the strong man stumbles, or where the doer of deeds could have done them better. The credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena, whose face is marred by dust and sweat and blood; who strives valiantly; who errs, who comes short again and again, because there is no effort without error and shortcoming; but who does actually strive to do the deeds; who knows great enthusiasms, the great devotions; who spends himself in a worthy cause; who at the best knows in the end the triumph of high achievement, and who at the worst, if he fails, at least fails while daring greatly, so that his place shall never be with those cold and timid souls who neither know victory nor defeat.

    There is no effort without error and shortcoming. But in the worst of cases, that means failing while daring greatly. Because failing while daring greatly is better than not daring at all. These are words to live by. And I would like to think that our team’s efforts to bring digital NFT art to Toronto’s condominium market is daring on some level.

    What is clear to me after speaking with a lot of people this evening is that most people don’t know what an NFT is and they don’t know how this all works. But at the same time, they recognize that real and meaningful change is underway. (I was on Global TV this evening trying to explain this stuff.)

    We may be the first (at least here in Toronto), but I would put money on the fact that we won’t be the last developer to incorporate NFTs into their projects. And that’s a good thing. We should all be building on top of each other’s work. Let’s dare greatly.

  • From free CDs to a decentralized internet

    This is a great Twitter thread by Chris Dixon talking about why Web 3 — the next major iteration of the internet — is kind of a big deal. In it, Dixon refers to Web 1 as the period from about 1990 to 2005. This is the period of time that started out with CompuServe and AOL sending us all free CDs in the mail and most of us using a dial-up modem to access the internet. Web 2 was the period from about 2005 to 2020. It is the iteration of the internet that gave birth to social media as most of us know it today. If you subscribe to this timeline, then we are in year one of what’s next. Maybe it’ll also run for another 15 years or maybe it won’t. But either way, getting in on the ground floor is usually a pretty valuable thing. When Dixon tweets, I listen.

  • The capital of Ethereum

    Few people in Toronto seem to be talking about the important role that this city has played and is playing when it comes to cryptocurrencies (specifically Ethereum). And if you believe, as I do, that Ethereum and other blockchain technologies have the ability to form the backbone for an entirely new kind of world, then this is kind of a big deal.

    The Financial Times recently published this article about “Wall Street’s crypto whisperer.” It is about a guy named Joseph Lubin who is the founder of a crypto company called ConsenSys and previously the co-founder of Ethereum. Lubin is from Toronto.

    If you read the article, you’ll see that Lubin is a pretty bright guy (and now a billionaire with his crypto assets). Born in Toronto, he ended up going to Princeton to study computer science. He worked on Wall Street for a bit (hence the whisperer moniker), but also did a bunch of other interesting stuff, including moving to Jamaica with a girlfriend and working on music production.

    In 2013, he was back in Toronto and went to a Bitcoin meetup in the city. The article says it was in a downtown warehouse (which makes it sound pretty cool and underground). And at this downtown warehouse meetup, he met a guy (actually a teenager) named Vitalik Buterin. Vitalik had just written a white paper on what would ultimately become Ethereum and he gave Lubin a copy. Lubin was so “blown away” when he read it that he decided to join the movement.

    The two (and presumably others) would then go on to live together in shared houses in Toronto, Miami, and Zug (Switzerland), and work on this new smart contract technology. Today, Ethereum has a market cap of nearly $400 billion (as of September 12, 2021).

    Even if you ignore for a second that we’re talking about crypto technologies, this is still a fascinating city building story. It is fascinating because it shows the value of in-person urban interactions (again, the two allegedly connected at a meetup in a downtown warehouse). And it is fascinating because the Toronto braintrust has been instrumental in advancing a technology that could arguably end up powering not only the future of the internet but perhaps the world.

    At the same time, it strikes me that we need to be much better at both celebrating and encouraging these kinds of new ideas locally. Are we out in the world telling this story to the best of our abilities? Have we properly positioned Toronto as one of the most important places for cryptocurrencies and innovation in general? Mayor Suarez of Miami has been a great promoter of his city in this regard.

    “Innovation” isn’t usually neat and tidy. It happens on the fringe and it is often not obvious at the outset. Imagine what an Ethereum pitch would have sounded like back in 2013. But this is how new ideas start. And Toronto has proven to be full of them.

    Photo by Narciso Arellano on Unsplash