Is Web3 anything? • Hacker News Board

Re: Is Web3 anything?

#21

Post by CryptoPunk » Fri, Dec 10, 2021, 6:40 AM UTC

jolux wrote: post #13

CryptoPunk wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The government encompasses all of those things, so I think when the author says "trust the government", it implies all of those things.

Right, but the government is not just some unaccountable third party that sits between you and the rest of society. It is meant to embody the society, and, in a democracy, represent its interests effectively.

The government, and all of its institutions, are indeed a third party.

The government is not some representative of the collective will. Thomas Sowell provides his experience at the Department of Labor in 1960 as a poignant demonstration of the fallacy of that notion: https://youtu.be/v6PDpCnMvvw?t=38

Another example would be the latest $1.5 trillion infrastructure bill. It was 1,500 pages long and no legislator read even an appreciable fraction of it. There were provisions in it that the public was discovering a week before it was voted on, like one threatening to classify cryptocurrency nodes as brokers with KYC requirements for any transaction they processed.

Apparently Treasury had worked behind the scenes to get this provision in the bill, to give DeFi the Patriot Act treatment: https://twitter.com/jswihart/status/1422785103386669058?s=20

Re: Is Web3 anything?

#22

Post by westoncb » Fri, Dec 10, 2021, 6:40 AM UTC

dzonga wrote: post #12

jolux wrote: post #9

All of the examples of having to trust the government in this article neglect the fact that trusting the government is not just trusting the government, and it’s not just the government storing a deed or giving you a Social Security Number that makes it real. It’s the whole complex web of laws and regulations that created these policies that make them real, and the people (your fellow citizens) who have collectively…

succinctly said. all these web3 / crypto folks forget complex laws exist to prevent and remedy situations that can't be simply solved by smart contracts. most of the laws are so complex, we've professionals who specialise in them.

I think there's also a substantial subset of cases that are simple/common/clear enough to have managed through an automated contract, and being able to cut out the cost of depending on the legal system would be game-changing for many people/projects/etc.

So it seems like a good complement, not a replacement.

Re: Is Web3 anything?

#23

Post by aunty_helen » Fri, Dec 10, 2021, 6:40 AM UTC

baby wrote: post #6

A much more interesting news in the space, not being discussed on HN: polygon just acquired Mir for 400 million $. They are slowly acquiring every zero-knolwedge teams in the space. https://blockworks.co/polygon-acquires-mir-in-400m-deal-to-s...

That doesn’t fit the narrative a bunch of cranky 40 year old engineers want to believe in.

Let’s all instead gather around and discuss how code run on an aws ec2 instance solves any problem blockchain could ever hope to solve

Re: Is Web3 anything?

#24

Post by 908087 » Fri, Dec 10, 2021, 6:41 AM UTC

ssss11 wrote: post #20

tracyhenry wrote: post #3

> Once submitted, that “contract” will be carried out exactly as specified. It is observable to everyone, debuggable, and non-falsifiable. But a centralized database can also achieve this, right? The premise of the general public trusting a blockchain more than an established, centralized 3rd party (e.g. government) seems so feeble.

Well not exactly. The blockchain is distributed and you effectively can’t modify it (let’s not get into 51% attacks etc) A centralised database is controlled and modifiable by the owner - government, private company or whoever. They will act on their best interest not yours. I don’t personally have a problem with government having my dat although they’re usually useless at implementing technology, but a decentralised…

If the problem you have with the web is that "the government has your data", putting it on a public blockchain certainly isn't going to solve that problem.

Re: Is Web3 anything?

#25

Post by errantmind » Fri, Dec 10, 2021, 6:41 AM UTC

jolux wrote: post #13

CryptoPunk wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The government encompasses all of those things, so I think when the author says "trust the government", it implies all of those things.

Right, but the government is not just some unaccountable third party that sits between you and the rest of society. It is meant to embody the society, and, in a democracy, represent its interests effectively.

It represents the lowest common denominator of what everyone can agree on. Democracies have problems when that denominator gets really low, but are relatively great when it is high

Re: Is Web3 anything?

#26

Post by gfodor » Fri, Dec 10, 2021, 6:41 AM UTC

dzonga wrote: post #12

jolux wrote: post #9

All of the examples of having to trust the government in this article neglect the fact that trusting the government is not just trusting the government, and it’s not just the government storing a deed or giving you a Social Security Number that makes it real. It’s the whole complex web of laws and regulations that created these policies that make them real, and the people (your fellow citizens) who have collectively…

succinctly said. all these web3 / crypto folks forget complex laws exist to prevent and remedy situations that can't be simply solved by smart contracts. most of the laws are so complex, we've professionals who specialise in them.

alternatively, maybe web3 / crypto folks haven't "forgotten" something so obvious as "complex laws and lawyers exist."

Re: Is Web3 anything?

#27

Post by ssss11 » Fri, Dec 10, 2021, 6:43 AM UTC

baby wrote: post #6

A much more interesting news in the space, not being discussed on HN: polygon just acquired Mir for 400 million $. They are slowly acquiring every zero-knolwedge teams in the space. https://blockworks.co/polygon-acquires-mir-in-400m-deal-to-s...

Yeah they’re gonna own all eth later 2

Re: Is Web3 anything?

#28

Post by qaq » Fri, Dec 10, 2021, 6:43 AM UTC

westoncb wrote: post #22

dzonga wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

succinctly said. all these web3 / crypto folks forget complex laws exist to prevent and remedy situations that can't be simply solved by smart contracts. most of the laws are so complex, we've professionals who specialise in them.

I think there's also a substantial subset of cases that are simple/common/clear enough to have managed through an automated contract, and being able to cut out the cost of depending on the legal system would be game-changing for many people/projects/etc. So it seems like a good complement, not a replacement.

Yep cause the cost of people who can put together a smart contract without major bugs is peanuts :)

Re: Is Web3 anything?

#29

Post by aardvarkr » Fri, Dec 10, 2021, 6:43 AM UTC

westoncb wrote: post #10

> Most of the descriptions I’ve seen focus on mechanisms - block chains, smart contracts, tokens, etc - but I would argue those are implementation details ... The real question is what fundamental capability are people pointing to when they talk about web3? That's exactly the change in focus needed in order for discussions of this topic to be more rational/sober/productive, imo.

Then it just becomes a solution in search of a problem. Utterly useless.

Re: Is Web3 anything?

#30

Post by Fordec » Fri, Dec 10, 2021, 6:45 AM UTC

dzonga wrote: post #12

jolux wrote: post #9

All of the examples of having to trust the government in this article neglect the fact that trusting the government is not just trusting the government, and it’s not just the government storing a deed or giving you a Social Security Number that makes it real. It’s the whole complex web of laws and regulations that created these policies that make them real, and the people (your fellow citizens) who have collectively…

succinctly said. all these web3 / crypto folks forget complex laws exist to prevent and remedy situations that can't be simply solved by smart contracts. most of the laws are so complex, we've professionals who specialise in them.

I've come to the acceptance that lawyers are to the legal system as software engineers are to technical systems. You pay people who specialize in knowing the ins and outs of a complex system so you can get on with your life as a citizen, founder, etc.

And people who espouse that we don't need laws or lawyers to run our society are making about as coherent sense as saying we can ship a unicorn entirely on no-code and without engineers. It's in the realm of possibilities, maybe, but it will be a house of cards ready to implode unless this mantra is, at best, sheepishly abandoned half way through the endeavor.