Reasons why we don’t need to wait for the academic validation before implementing OTV
I noticed that someone have been argued that we need the academic validation(peer review) before implementing the OTV idea. I want to list some reasons here why we don’t need to wait for the academic validation before implementing it.
First there is a business risk for waiting for the academic validation in this circumstance. For instance, we publish the paper and wait for the academic validation. In the mean time a copycat team picks up our idea to launch their copycat project. We all know what the copycats can do in this open source space.
While we are waiting for the academic validation, they are building a platform based on our idea. At the time when we get the validation from academic, the copycat project is already ahead of us in the platform development and becomes the first mover for this technology.
All our efforts in the research, innovation, and discovery in this breaking through technology will only benefit the copycat project. And it is likely that more than one copycat will show up while you are waiting for the academic validation.
Secondly the history has shown there is no need for waiting for the academic validation. Bitcoin and Ethereum didn’t have any academic validations in their early stage. Ethereum is still short of academic validation today. In term of academic validation, right now Iota has a better starting point than both Bitcoin and Ethereum. The Tangle has been academically verified.
When Vitalik was asked the same question for Ethereum’s short of academic validation in the Lex Interview, his answer is time. The main reason that Ethereum didn’t go the same rout as Cardano for academic formulations is that it would take too much time to do so. They don’t have the time to wait. Sometime you have to do the software implementation and academic validation in the same time.