Live data from Hacker News

Is Web3 anything?

chris-granger.com

101–110 of 442 posts

Re: Is Web3 anything?

#101
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…

Democracy solves the Byzantine agreement problem just fine already. I like the aspects of decentralisation that help you preserve democracy, but beyond that it’s not necessary to replace every single aspect of a functioning democracy with a cryptographic commitment scheme. It would be worse if you did. That vision of society sounds terrible. (I can’t comment on this without noting that of all the interpretations of t…

> Democracy solves the Byzantine agreement problem just fine already.

That’s nice when you and your counterparty are part of the same democracy, or potentially allied ones. But how do you enforce contracts when your government and their government are at war?

(The governments say “you shouldn’t; they’re the enemy.” Well, screw the governments, I want to make positive-sum trades in the hopes of increasing global GDP and ratcheting us up out of the need for wars over unevenly-distributed scarce resources in the first place.)

All the speculative value of cryptocurrencies is based on their utility in making and fulfilling the terms of contracts, when a government or governments don’t want to — or fundamentally aren’t able to — grant that contract any legal enforceability.

And much of the rest of the value derives from the ability of Proof-of-Work mining to be used to convert local export-controlled assets into exportable digital assets. (The whole reason PoW has stuck around as long as it has is that capital flight in China still needs it for a few years yet.)

Re: Is Web3 anything?

#102
post #7

But is there any case where you'd actually trust a pile of blockchains more than an existing trust mechanism (whether that's neighbourliness, contract law, or something else)? If you're not a programmer, getting a programmer to review your smart contract probably costs more than getting a lawyer to review your regular contract. If you are a programmer, you probably know better than to rely on some code being bug-free…

In the case of smart-contracts you at least have the possibility of knowing, with existing trust mechanisms this is impossible.

Re: Is Web3 anything?

#103

Is Web3 even a thing? Outside HackerNews, I only see it mentioned in crypto-circles, but on HN there’s another article at the top every day.

Kinda? It’s under ridicule here because it’s quite contrived of a name and it adopts an ethos that is not put into practice by its developers and proponents.

There is a popular library called web3.js as well, which is used to find and communicate with nearby nodes of distributed ledgers. It’s pretty clever and convenient.

Since those kind of nodes store variables forever for free, developers dont need any other server side infrastructure and are able to make services extremely quickly, cheaply, and have a quick goto market strategy and it is extremely lucrative, and the users absorb all the costs of writing data. This is where things are 10x better than existing alternatives: revenue paths, overhead costs, speed.

not the user experience or the performance of the underlying technology.

Re: Is Web3 anything?

#104
post #58

> what if the neighbors collude and vote that you failed to improve the park despite having done what was specified. The contract could further specify that some neutral third party acts as an arbiter in that case. If there's anything that shows that Web3.0, smart contracts and so on are a bad solution in search of a non-existent problem, it's this. The ``problem'' is apparently that we don't trust each other and our…

I've been to some HOA meetings. I think it's more likely that there's no consensus than that people agree that the park was improved. Even if the organizer did their best and spent a thousand bucks on supplies. There's no way to "make everyone whole again". Or maybe a majority of neighbors just aren't good people and realize they can get a nice park and their money back just by voting "no" as a bloc. All the fancy number theory hasn't really achieved anything.

Re: Is Web3 anything?

#105
post #8
post #7

But is there any case where you'd actually trust a pile of blockchains more than an existing trust mechanism (whether that's neighbourliness, contract law, or something else)? If you're not a programmer, getting a programmer to review your smart contract probably costs more than getting a lawyer to review your regular contract. If you are a programmer, you probably know better than to rely on some code being bug-free…

The irony of course being that you would have to fully trust the programmer who reviews your contract.

Hmm, we already trust programmers enough to design our cryptography (hash functions and such)

Re: Is Web3 anything?

#106

> Unfortunately with trust in low supply these days... This is at the core of the issue: no technology, but especially not web3, is just a tool. Tech is inherently political because of both these kinds of underlying assumptions about the world, and how it shapes habits and beliefs of people using it. Creating tech which accepts "trust is in low demand" and proceeds to fix it by making trusting people unnecessary, is…

You might be interested in CirclesUBI, which is pretty leftist as crypto's go. I think it's in the minority only only because bitcoin gave the right leaning folk a head start. The cryptocommunists will be along any minute now.

Re: Is Web3 anything?

#108

> 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.

If I understood Web3 correctly, it would be exactly like traditional web, except that: * The source code of all websites would be open-source, and accessible to anyone. It could still be changed, but it could not be done secretly. * All the actions of the users of the websites would be public. If we take social forums, for example Hacker News, it would mean that: * The algorithm behind the front page of social forums…

I’d also put the moderators and administrators having no way of skewing things as a negative. They do lots of good things for the community like removing flags on topics, merging topics and reupping topics that are interesting for a second chance. It’s a good demonstration that pure algorithmic feeds still need gardening.

And the fee thing is why none of this will work in practice so it’s a really big negative. Who on Earth wants to be nickel and dimed across the Internet for really over expensive compute and storage?

Re: Is Web3 anything?

#109
post #101

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Democracy solves the Byzantine agreement problem just fine already. I like the aspects of decentralisation that help you preserve democracy, but beyond that it’s not necessary to replace every single aspect of a functioning democracy with a cryptographic commitment scheme. It would be worse if you did. That vision of society sounds terrible. (I can’t comment on this without noting that of all the interpretations of t…

> Democracy solves the Byzantine agreement problem just fine already. That’s nice when you and your counterparty are part of the same democracy, or potentially allied ones. But how do you enforce contracts when your government and their government are at war? (The governments say “you shouldn’t; they’re the enemy.” Well, screw the governments, I want to make positive-sum trades in the hopes of increasing global GDP a…

If that’s what you want web3 for, I’m actually quite happy for you to record your treachery on a public ledger. There is a reason the government doesn’t want you to do it, and that’s that sanctions are one of the only reasonable deterrents to war that we have. I can’t believe you would advocate for interfering with that on a public forum, in 2021 when western democracies are already struggling to make economic sanctions hurt because the autocrats are all in cahoots. https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2021/12/the-aut...

Re: Is Web3 anything?

#110
I'm tired of circular web3 discussions. All I see is people arguing for "but, maybe you shouldn't trust the government, maybe you should trust some math that works like a government in this limited scope".

All I see is markets which sidestep all the rules enforced by governments to keep them fair (which prevent things like trading with yourself to create fake transactions), and none of the "park renovation" or "enabling trade for people in oppressed regimes" hypothetical examples. Whatever crypto claimed as values they are not actually being used in practice. The only things it visibly succeeded at were enabling ponzi schemes, enabling dark web trade, making lives easier for ransomware, and using a ton of electricity.

I can't buy that web3 will deliver on any value it claims based on the monumental screw-up that industry did with cryptocoins. Especially when all values are hypothetical, and deal with abstract things like "trust".

Post reply on HN