Thread by @CosmosClub_

Why can the metaverse only obtain mass adoption if compatible with IBC?

In short:

🧐 IBC-compatible metaverses are like the internet

🤡 non-IBC-compatible metaverses are like an intranet

Let us elaborate 👇

🧵

First off, what is the metaverse?

According to @binance:

"The metaverse is a concept of a persistent, online, 3D universe that combines multiple different virtual spaces."

Will repeat that last part: "MULTIPLE different virtual spaces."

Second off, what is IBC?

The Inter-Blockchain Communication protocol (IBC) is a reliable & secure interoperability protocol that handles transport, authentication, and ordering of data across different sovereign blockchains.

IBC is also referred to as "TCP/IP for blockchains".

Given that the metaverse is supposed to run across multiple virtual spaces, it seems pretty obvious that something like IBC has to be adopted.

Unfortunately, today's metaverses generally run on centralised services or #Ethereum for the decentralised metaverses.

Examples are:

Centralised: @Meta and @facebook is the most known example here.

Decentralised: @decentraland @AxieInfinity @TheSandboxGame and thousands of other games and virtual worlds running on #Ethereum or Ethereum L2s like #Polygon, #BSC or #Ronin.

Now what's the problem with those setups?

Centralised: Well, isn't it obvious...

Decentralised on Ethereum or L2s: Complete lack or in the best case a tedious process to move between virtual words running on different chains.

In other words, if we don't have smooth movement between whatever chain a metaworld deems best to run on, we will always see siloed gardens. An intranet.

Metaverses are supposed to be the new iteration of the internet.

IBC can make that happen.

If you've found this thread helpful, please like or retweet.

Follow @CastCosmos for more threads like this.

Subscribe to our weekly newsletter on all things #Cosmos, #IBC and $ATOM
getrevue.co/profile/cosmos…