Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Is Web3 Bullshit?

maxread.substack.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

161–170 of 383 posts

Re: Is Web3 Bullshit?

#161

Post by chewbacha »

lottin wrote: post #135
flooow wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If the crypto community wants to demonstrate that it isn't a giant Ponzi scheme, why not come up with a non-deflationary token, which will not massively reward 'early adopters' at the expense of everyone else, in perpetuity? (A non-deflationary token would be one where the supply grows by some reasonable percentage every year, effectively acting as a flat tax on one's holdings). In reality, non-deflationary cryptocur…

Tokens are neither deflationary nor inflationary. The idea that an asset is deflationary or inflationary implies that the supply of the asset determines its price. This is incorrect from a theoretical standpoint, as well as from what empirical evidence tells us. It's a misapplication of the Quantity Theory of Money. QTM is a theory of money, it doesn't apply to stocks, tokens, assets in general, or in situations wher…

How would I rectify that against the model of supply and demand, where increasing supply without increasing demand would result in its price deflating?

Re: Is Web3 Bullshit?

#162

Post by paulgb »

woodruffw wrote: post #131
paulgb wrote: post #126

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It’s an argument of semantics, really: if it will eventually stop printing coins, I’d consider it inflationary until that point in time and non-inflationary thereafter. In practice, current holders are being diluted to subsidize the security of the network.

This isn’t consistent with the “priced in” position put forward by the original commenter. An asset class that is going to be fixed in quantity for the rest of time is an obvious target for pricing-in.

By that logic the USD has some inflation baked in too, it’s just that in Bitcoin’s case the number is exact and in USD it’s a guess. It’s really just arguing semantics, though. I get both sides’ arguments.

Re: Is Web3 Bullshit?

#163

Post by jazzyjackson »

jiveturkey wrote: post #112
mattlondon wrote: post #7

It saddens me that they chose "web3" for the latest crypto pyramid scheme. Call it what you want, but please don't sully the web with your plat du jour crypto antics. Also for what it is worth, the web has been decentralised from the very start, I don't see what the fuss is about apart from just everyone getting rich selling the next hot coin/token/whatever.

> the web has been decentralised maybe the web per se, but in practical terms it depends on the DNS which is decidedly not decentralized.

always seemed weird to me that the hosts file never became a little personal address book, with some push mechanism to notify me of address changes, “gmail.com is moving to x.x.x.x”

Re: Is Web3 Bullshit?

#164

Post by chewbacha »

JohnJamesRambo wrote: post #150
flooow wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If the crypto community wants to demonstrate that it isn't a giant Ponzi scheme, why not come up with a non-deflationary token, which will not massively reward 'early adopters' at the expense of everyone else, in perpetuity? (A non-deflationary token would be one where the supply grows by some reasonable percentage every year, effectively acting as a flat tax on one's holdings). In reality, non-deflationary cryptocur…

Show me a stock anyone is interested in that isn’t expected to go up and reward early adopters. “If the stock community wants to demonstrate that it isn't a giant Ponzi scheme, why not come up with a non-deflationary stock, which will not massively reward 'early adopters' at the expense of everyone else, in perpetuity?”

Stocks (aka securities) and other products also suffer from Ponzi schemes though. Hence the bureaucracy of the SEC and other governments tasked with regulating and policing the industry.

Re: Is Web3 Bullshit?

#165

Post by helen___keller »

_vufv wrote: post #33

One aspect that I strongly dislike about "web3" is that it poisons the discourse with its incentives. I don't believe that every person on Twitter with $BTC in their profile understands or can knowledgeably argue the benefits of Web3, but their crypto holdings make them a hard-lined crypto zealot in the hopes of multiplying few hundred dollars they've put in. It's fairly widely known how laughable it is to look for u…

> I'm surprised that there is no middle ground - there are either fervent advocates or fervent opposition, and with very few exceptions

The middle ground would be people who aren't invested in crypto, but have tried a few dApps and think they can be neat sometimes but maybe are rough around the edges and might be better in a few years.

These people don't exist because web3 technologies have nothing appealing to end users, only to investors. This might change eventually, but for now there's literally no reason to use blockchain if you aren't looking to invest or speculate in something.

Re: Is Web3 Bullshit?

#166

Post by pas »

ethanbond wrote: post #155
JohnJamesRambo wrote: post #150

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Show me a stock anyone is interested in that isn’t expected to go up and reward early adopters. “If the stock community wants to demonstrate that it isn't a giant Ponzi scheme, why not come up with a non-deflationary stock, which will not massively reward 'early adopters' at the expense of everyone else, in perpetuity?”

Then stop acting like it’s a currency and/or infrastructure. If it just spirals indefinitely in value then it can’t be used as either. Pretty straightforward.

It's value is exactly determined by supply-and-demand. It's just as much a "foreign currency" as let's say Vatican Angelbucks. (We know that only a fixed amount of angelbucks will ever exist. So it's deflatory, and it has no earthly uses. But you can send it to your pals via PrayWire, so you can buy coffee with, and so on.)

And if you look at the price graphs it's not always going up. It's a synthetic currency with no real backing economy (and the transaction costs are insane). Pretty straightforward.

Re: Is Web3 Bullshit?

#168

Post by woodruffw »

paulgb wrote: post #162
woodruffw wrote: post #131

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This isn’t consistent with the “priced in” position put forward by the original commenter. An asset class that is going to be fixed in quantity for the rest of time is an obvious target for pricing-in.

By that logic the USD has some inflation baked in too, it’s just that in Bitcoin’s case the number is exact and in USD it’s a guess. It’s really just arguing semantics, though. I get both sides’ arguments.

I don’t know about “baked in,” but of course the USD is inflationary: that’s been the explicit Fed policy for decades. It’s been the policy because small amounts of inflation have a measurable economic benefit.

But again: this doesn’t change the fact that Bitcoin is deflationary. It’s a fixed supply of coins on a ledger that every current stakeholder has a strong deflationary interest in. The fact that there might be inflationary forces internal to Bitcoin’s economy doesn’t change that.

Re: Is Web3 Bullshit?

#169

Post by almost »

The absolute best argument I’ve seen so far against “web3” is this very pro-web3 and very clear article.

https://www.preethikasireddy.com/post/the-architecture-of-a-...

Read that, and make sure you understand the basics of what Ethereum, IPFS and maybe a few more technologies from the article etc actually are, then think about if that sounds like sensible thing to do.

If you can still take it seriously afterwards then I’m impressed!

Re: Is Web3 Bullshit?

#170

Post by kevinak »

anchpop wrote: post #158
kevinak wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm curious why you think this is the case. It's close to impossible (good luck convincing people to devalue their money) to increase the Bitcoin supply other than through minig.

Loans create “virtual money” in a way, which does contribute to inflation (in fact, controlling lending is a primary way the federal reserve controls inflation)

Yes, in the current fiat system that is the case, but there is no way for someone (a bank or government) to inflate the supply in world where Bitcoin is the currency everyone uses.
Post reply on HN