@Plasma Why hasn’t Big Tech shown interest if Plasma is truly structural?
So, if Plasma (XPL) is a structural breakthrough, then Big Tech should already be sniffing around it, for they are known to avoid missing actual changes in the infrastructure, like AWS leading the charge for containerization, or Google developing Kubernetes before the majority of developers knew what the phrase even means.
Let's examine real-world usage. The scale at which Big Tech businesses operate is absurd. Traffic volumes are understood. Compliance costs are understood. SLAS are understood. Plasma's pitch for stablecoin rails and payment specialists gets a decent reception on crypto Twitter. But enterprises know how to use internal ledgers or bank APIs to handle settlement needs. Stripe needs no chain. Apple Pay needs no chain.
How does that stack up compared to something like Ethereum rollups, or even something like Solana? They got "the attention from the majors because they had composability, dev mindshare." Plasma is intentionally narrow. That's not bad, but that limits interest.
Therefore, so, the truth? Well, plasma might be useful but not necessary to their structure. Big Tech does nothing unless it’s absolutely necessary. Until it is, XPL will be only a crypto bet, not a necessity in enterprise structural planning.
