The beauty of it is that as long as none of the cryptocurrency/blockchain projects manages to really achieve what they're set out to do the only objective metric to judge them is how much money they manage to pull. When everything is a scam it's kind of hard to single out anything. As such I suppose you could say that "TRON" is a pretty cool name, so buy buy buy.

Beyond that it really looks like a rather simple pump and dump. If you click the "technical docs" on the front page you end up here: https://tron.network/resources?name=1&lng=en

There are 3 PDFs here. "What is TRON" is a 7 page marketing brochure that's about as technical as the MacDonald's menu. The "Design Book of TRON architecture" sounds a lot more promising until you see that it's 12 pages long. It's extremely high level and doesn't tell you anything of value. Finally you have the "TRON Protobuf protocol" which is 10 pages long and exactly what it sounds like.

In other words, business as usual in the cryptocurrency world.

> Can HN help me understand why TRON is better than the sea of competition

It's not. It's just a pump and dump scheme with no solid tech at all. 60% of all tokens were given privately for example.

There have also been allegations of plagiarism [1]

1 - https://finance.yahoo.com/news/exclusive-researchers-allege-...

TRON: for investors that don’t have a CLU.

> Can HN help me understand why TRON is better than the sea of competition (Sia/Filecoin/Storj/Maidsafe/etc)?

I have been following all those and based on the numerous articles I have read they are pretty much all failed. Blockchain just doesn't make sense for that application.

As someone who has also been following those projects, I actually think this is a great application for cryptocurrency. (Not necessarily blockchain; I'm pretty sure Maidsafe actually doesn't use a blockchain.)

The idea of a trustless, fully decentralized, scalable, redundant, anonymous storage market is pretty alluring, and I see no reason why it's not entirely achievable with current cryptocurrency technology.

I agree many of those platforms have issues, but from what I can tell those issues are mostly a result of the system's immaturity; not an inherent flaw in the idea of a decentralized storage system itself.

Here's my current take on each:

* Filecoin - Doesn't exist (yet). It's just a whitepaper; no actual software.

* Storj - Not actually decentralized (as currently implemented). Users need to go through a federated service (of which only one currently exists; the one run by the creators of Storj) to actually store their files.

* Maidsafe - I'm actually not sure. The developers of Maidsafe seem to be working on much, much more than just file storage, which means the project is very complex. In any case, the software is still too immature to actually use for real.

* Sia - This is actually pretty promising. A couple weeks ago I managed to upload and store a few GB worth of files on Sia for about $2/TB-month. Going to try using it for my online backups via Duplicati once I get a chance to play with it more. The core software is still pretty clunky though, and not recommended for production use.

* TRON - I have no idea. I haven't looked into it.

About Maidsafe: their goal is to build a new descentralised internet, and I think they still are in the alpha phase with testing on a big swarm of VPS's. It is a moonshot project, with all its pros and cons. And yeah, they use Rust ;)

Filecoin hasn't launched yet. None of the others have much traction, but I'm not sure I'd call them failed yet.

TRON is just garbage though.

TRON has one thing going for it - its name evokes a well known movie.

That's literally it

I am probably super wierd for this but my immediate thought was https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TRON_project

I suppose it's too much to hope that BitTorrent fights for the users now?