I lack the requisite understanding and background in mathematics and related computer technology to have 100% confidence in the answer I will give. But given my level of ignorance in all related domains to the new technology of cryptocurrency I can only reason as best I can at my own level of laymen-ship.
I did major in biology in university, so, I try to draw upon those related rational skills as best I can in making my conclusions or guesses.
So, here goes.
From my perspective the value of peer review in the Cardano project, at least for me, is that it increases my confidence in the Cardano project NOT being a scam operation. That is important for me because Iām too ignorant of modern computer technology and science to sufficiently spot an intentional scam from a project that is not one. An example is sometime ago I bought a 1 or a few MIOTA coins based upon the claims and stated vision.
A project that is not a scam can still fail. I now suspect MIOTA or IOTA is an intentional scam but Cardano Iām much more confident is not, even if the project fails. But that said the other value in my view in Cardano submitting its research papers to the peer review process is that Cardano will be one of the early groups and communities that ADDED to the academic body of work pertaining to cryptocurrency and blockchain. This value is more in the realm of academia and intellectualism and not in the realm of financial profits. So, āpeer reviewā in this sense only matters to those in the cypto sphere who have varying degrees of appreciation for adding to a body of existing knowledge.
But Charles once mentioned something I never heard of and it led me too look it up. He mentioned āformal methodsā I think it is called. If I recall correctly from what I read its often something (mathematical) used in engineering. It is the rigors of applying formal methods to various developments in the Cardano technology that I think will ultimately have more bearing on the profitability of Cardano and the ADA token than peer review.
I could be misunderstanding this and Iām sure someone will point out my errors if they exist.
Maybe the last thing I want to say is that Iām the only person in my world, my small world, that I know of who has bought in crypto or watches videos on it or reads material on it. Albeit, I live more a central city or inner-city setting, but consider nearly everyone I know has a smartphone. Iām suggesting neither bitcoin or etheruem have as much of the human population interested in them or invested in them as we may imagine. Most humans involved in either remain statistical outliers I would thinkārelative to the total human population. I live in the USA I should point out. What this tells me is that tremendous opportunity still exists in the emerging crypto sphere.
You know⦠as a quick analogy, as imperfect as it may be, Sugar Ray Robinson for whom the āPound for Poundā title was started, had over 100 professional fights if I remember correctly. Contrast that to Mohammad Ali who had under 40 career professional fights I believe. Well⦠in this early stage (like the 1st stage the UFC underwent) bitcoin and ethereum look undefeatable like a Ronda Rousey in part because the UFC cyrpto for women is still so unevolved, but once the competiotion becomes more evolved and complete as a fighter the weaknesses in the bitcoin, etheruem Ronda Rouseysā might become more apparent. A new champion could emerge.