Thread by @CryptoGirlNova

1) The biggest innovation the #crypto industry needs is making blockchains work together.

The ones leading the race to TRUE interoperability are:

$QNT
$ATOM
$DOT

But who is doing it better?

THE BATTLE OF THE GIANTS

🧵👇

#Quant #Cosmos #Polkadot

2) With the emergence of new blockchain protocols almost everyday the cryptocurrency industry won't ever be able to move forward if we don't find a way to make them work together.

Can you imagine having to use more than 1000 different layer 1 protocols someday?

3) A few projects have noticed this and have stepped up to make blockchains work together in TRUE interopability fashion.

While also important, we are not looking at "swap interopability" ( $RUNE, $Router, $CHNG,...).

This is al about development on multiple chains.

4) The ones doing it best and quite possibly the only ones are QNT, ATOM and DOT.

There are some key difference however. We'll be looking at:

• Infrastructure
• Interoperability
• Audience
• Developer support
• mApps vs dApps

Lets go 🔥

5) INFRASTRUCTURE PART 1

- Quant is not a blockchain. It uses Overledger (operating system) to connect different blockchains.

- Polkadot is a layer 0 blockchain. Other blockchains can be built on polkadot and sent data to each other easily.

6) INFRASTRUCTURE PART 2

- Cosmos exists as a platform for different blockchains. They can communicate through their IBC protocol.

7) INTEROPERABILITY PART 1

- Quant looks to connect almost ALL sectors and is not limited to blockchains only.

• APIs
• Blockchains
• Data providers
• Financial systems
• Enterprises

- Polkadot aims to interoperate only Parachains which are blockchains built on Polkadot.

8) INTEROPERABILITY PART 2

- Cosmos aims to interoperate only zones which are blockchains built on Cosmos.

Comparing interopability it's clear Quant is targeting a potential larger market.

This doesn't mean it's better or worse however. Every project targets its own niche.

9) AUDIENCE

- Quant doesn't really target individuals or developers. They focus on companies, enterprises and partners including banks.

- Polkadot and Cosmos are more interested in getting companies and developers to build blockchains on them.

10) DEVELOPER SUPPORT PART 1

All of these 3 take developer support super serious with tutorials, grants and programs available.

BUT it's here where the bigger differences take place.

- Quant introduces mApps to developers, which are multi-chain decentralized applications.

11) DEVELOPER SUPPORT PART 2

- Quant introduces mApps which are basically dApps that can be built on multiple blockchains at the same time.

- Cosmos and Polkadot give developers the ability to connect normal dApps to each other.

What's the difference?

12) mApps VS dApps PART 1

- mApps use "treaty contracts" instead of "smart contracts".

This allows contracts to run off-chain AND on multiple blockchains at the same time.

- dApps are still limited to a single blockchain. You are stuck with the pros and cons of the chain.

13) mApps VS dApps PART 2

With mApps you can take the best part of 1 chain like the security of ethereum and combine it with the scalability like high TPS from Fantom.

Combining the absolute best of every chain without the limitations of one.

14) mApps VS dApps PART 3

dApps can only use multiple chains if you connect different dApps together.

An individual dApp is still stuck to the pros and cons of the chain it chose to built on.

MApps in general have greater utility than a dApp built on a single blockchain.

15) CONCLUSION:

All three of these projects open the world to a multi-chain future.

Due to this they will ALL have a chance at a place in the future economy especially since all 3 of them are fairly large already and as such have a far lesser chance of failing.

16) Connecting dApps on individual blockchains together is equally needed as allowing a dApp (called a Mapp) to be built on multiple blockchains immediately.

Although I'm a pretty big fan of all three I'm not going to lie that Quant really is a beast on its own.

17) Cosmos and Polkadot more or less directly compete with each other through their solutions to take on interopability.

Quant however really has no competition yet in its solution to take on interopability.

mApps are also pretty awesome as well as Quant targeting ALL sectors.

18) While almost any project I discover or write an overview thread about I always get the same comments.

• "Isn't crypto X also doing this"?
• "Isn't crypto Y doing this better"?

Talking about Quant there was never actually anyone able to comment a direct competitor.

19) Simply because there is none.

There was never any debate and I'm writing this as unbiased and objective as can be as you are always used to see from me.

That doesn't mean Cosmos and polkadot have many though. They likely only have each other (at the moment).

20) Although I'm mostly in stables right now due to the macro conditions I'm likely more inclined to take positions in both QNT and ATOM in the near future.

Purely because I have a small stronger preference towards Cosmos instead of Polkadot.

Nova out ❤️

21) If you want to keep up to date to most of my content and interesting projects give me a follow @CryptoGirlNova.

I also research the communities top voted cryptocurrency every week so you can keep track of all the most exciting projects.

Your favorite writer Nova 📘

22) If you had value from this and liked this thread, it would really bring a smile to my face if you could retweet the first post so this can help as many people as possible.

Everyone deserves free knowledge 📘

Love you all ❤️

First post 👇

https://twitter.com/CryptoGirlNova/status/1577396816798224406?t=OIhMgoguC1Py1wk7nDiHYQ&s=19