Web3 Is Bullshit • Hacker News Board

Re: Web3 Is Bullshit

#121

Post by salawat » Mon, Dec 06, 2021, 1:56 AM UTC

md2020 wrote: post #101

salawat wrote: post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>making it impossible to set a price on them that will support the artist. What part of post-scarcity don't you understand? Money doesn't matter. Post-scarcity.

> Money doesn’t matter. That would be a pretty huge departure from how we currently create and transact anything of value, so I’d say I don’t understand that.

Nothing to be ashamed of tbqh. Post-scarcity is the type of thing that will probably give everyone nowadays nightmares and existential ennui.

Imagine life where the guy bumming on the street and the guy working hard at his craft are both contributing the same amount in the long run because there is more than enough to keep everyone living comfortably, with no need to actually compete.

In fact, I imagine the trauma of the paradigm shift could very well break a generation or so adjusting to it.

Re: Web3 Is Bullshit

#122

Post by sobkas » Mon, Dec 06, 2021, 3:11 AM UTC

BeFlatXIII wrote: post #71

md2020 wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don’t understand how a post-scarcity society would even be desirable. For things like art and music, their creators need to be able to command a price on their creations. The digitization of these things removes their scarcity and essentially makes them function as a public good, making it impossible to set a price on them that will support the artist. If there’s no way for digital artists to support themselves, th…

> If there’s no way for digital artists to support themselves, then they’ll cease to exist. They'll have day jobs and create art on the weekends and evenings. Alternately, they'll be sponsored through some full-time fellowship to create art.

> They'll have day jobs and create art on the weekends and evenings. Alternately, they'll be sponsored through some full-time fellowship to create art.

If public wants a specific artist to create a specific art, they will be forced to pay such artist money to incentive them. Examples: patreon, Kickstarter, etc.

Re: Web3 Is Bullshit

#123

Post by drdeca » Mon, Dec 06, 2021, 4:50 AM UTC

Traster wrote: post #104

drdeca wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>> On a compute basis, blockchain networks don’t scale except by becoming the very same plutocratic [...] > The word "plutocratic" is linked to the Wikipedia definition for Proof of Stake. > PoS is not meant to increase scalability carlosdp isn't saying "because PoS isn't plutocratic, the claim 'can only scale by becoming plutocratic by using PoS' doesn't hold", Rather, carlosdp is saying that "because PoS isn't the…

I don't see how increasing efficiency is seriously distinct from increasing scalability? It seems to me that efficiency is a solution to scalability.

scalability is about things like "how many transactions per second you can handle", efficiency (in this context) is more about e.g. "how much is the cost of electricity used (and other such costs), divided by how many transactions".

You cannot increase number of transactions by just increasing the amount of electricity; it doesn't work that way.

If an intervention reduces the amount of electricity used without changing the amount of transactions that can happen, that increases the efficiency, but this does not thereby increase scalability.

So, something which reduces electricity use and hardware use, but doesn't substantially influence the amount of transactions that can go through, improves efficiency, but doesn't improve scalability.

Re: Web3 Is Bullshit

#124

Post by mrkramer » Mon, Dec 06, 2021, 9:42 PM UTC

streamofdigits wrote: post #100

mrkramer wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>if Web2 became a dystopic Zuckerbergia and Web3 is a disguised Cryptobrosia is there maybe a chance for a Web 2.5 that doesn't suck? Nobody is forcing people to use Facebook or any of Facebook's family of apps. I personally don't use FB or any of its apps for the last 10 years and I'm totally fine. >What would be its building blocks? IFPS, Activitypub, XMPP, Matrix? IP, TCP and HTTP are not going away anytime soon.…

> Nobody is forcing people to use Facebook or any of Facebook's family of apps. I personally don't use FB or any of its apps for the last 10 years and I'm totally fine. Sorry, this so unbeliably the wrong attitude. Compare with food producers, car manufacturers etc building toxic, addictive, dangerous products and being allowed free access to the market on the basis that "nobody is forcing consumers to buy their prod…

Yea nobody is forcing consumers to buy any products, essentially you vote with your money or in Facebook's case with your time and attention.

Re: Web3 Is Bullshit

#125

Post by bsansouci » Sat, Dec 18, 2021, 11:34 AM UTC

mattdesl wrote: post #116

leifg wrote: post #114

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Even if that’s true the argument “web3 is better for some users and developers” is very far from “web3 will disrupt the internet as we know it”

It is already disrupting the internet as we know it… NFTs, DAOs, trustless contracts, peer-to-peer payments w/o reliance on a central payment processors — these are all new concepts that the web hasn’t seen operating at a global scale, accessible with little more than a thin layer of JS and a browser extension. Perhaps this disruption won’t last, or won’t succeed in replacing traditional systems, but obviously in 202…

Hey Matt, I'm making my way through understanding this space and am struggling with the morality of it all, so I have a question for you: would you say that the trustless peer-to-peer world is a better future than today?

I'm asking given the realities of decentralized networks: it's currently slower, more expensive and harder to do transactions using peer to peer systems (and it's a bit tough to imagine it'll ever be as fast/simple/reliable as a centralized one because of the requirement to have consensus of nodes). And also given the realities of ETH contracts: they are agreements written in code (certainly mostly by people who don't have any background or formal education in writing laws or agreements, in comparison with lawyers)