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

Is Web3 anything?

chris-granger.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

361–370 of 442 posts

Re: Is Web3 anything?

#361

Post by throwaway405769 »

peoplefromibiza wrote: post #312
throwaway405769 wrote: post #308

Earlier quoted context omitted.

He can work for Alice or anyone else in the world without having to deal with intermediaries and bureaucracy.

> He can work for Alice or anyone else in the world what's stopping him now? > without having to deal with intermediaries and bureaucracy. you mean laws? edit: immagine this situation, Bob does the job, the other party never clicks on "done", Bob doesn't get the money, what Bob can do if there's no intermediary and/or bureaucracy protecting him?

Laws are not ideal and are often used to discriminate against certain groups.

> immagine this situation, Bob does the job, the other party never clicks on "done", Bob doesn't get the money, what Bob can do if there's no intermediary and/or bureaucracy protecting him?

As I said, there is a period of funds lock-up. In the worst case, Bob has to wait some time until the smart contract sends him his payment.

Re: Is Web3 anything?

#362

Post by peoplefromibiza »

throwaway405769 wrote: post #361
peoplefromibiza wrote: post #312

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> He can work for Alice or anyone else in the world what's stopping him now? > without having to deal with intermediaries and bureaucracy. you mean laws? edit: immagine this situation, Bob does the job, the other party never clicks on "done", Bob doesn't get the money, what Bob can do if there's no intermediary and/or bureaucracy protecting him?

Laws are not ideal and are often used to discriminate against certain groups. > immagine this situation, Bob does the job, the other party never clicks on "done", Bob doesn't get the money, what Bob can do if there's no intermediary and/or bureaucracy protecting him? As I said, there is a period of funds lock-up. In the worst case, Bob has to wait some time until the smart contract sends him his payment.

> Laws are not ideal and are often used to discriminate against certain groups

and your virtual ideology is better, how?

since nobody can enforce anything.

> As I said, there is a period of funds lock-up. In the worst case, Bob has to wait some time until the smart contract sends him his payment.

What if they payment is never sent and "some time" is forever?

You need laws after all (AKA a solution outside of the chain, or a deus ex machina if you want)

If I was Bob I would not see this thing you're talking about like a great advancement and would continue doing my job like I do it now.

I mean, I get you watched a lot of fiction and wanna feel like living as an outlaw, but even outlaws have laws and follow some of them.

You are trading mid to low trust in your local community for zero trust to some entity you'll never know, who'll never know you, couldn't care less about you and respecting the terms of some virtual contract and pretend we all should do the same.

Do you understand that this is the exact definition of "out of touch"?

Re: Is Web3 anything?

#363

Post by objectivetruth »

gorgoiler wrote: post #157
lmm wrote: 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…

This idea of a legal bug is interesting. It feels like The United States unofficial 0th amendment is the enshrined concept of getting off on a technicality . It comes with the territory with a written constitution. OJ, sexual relations with that woman , Capone’s unpaid parking tickets, hanging chads… or anything heard by the Supreme Circus. A huge part of the legal system, or at least the part that goes to trial, is…

Respectfully disagree -- these examples are mostly how the system is supposed to work to protect the rights of the individual.

OJ was found not guilty by a jury of his peers who felt there was reasonable doubt to his guilt. Sure, to the vast majority of us, he obviously did it and skated, but I'd guess there are 100 or 1000 non-publicized cases of an innocent person getting railroaded for every OJ.

Clinton paid a massive political price for his weasel language and related evasions, and some people think that price included Gore's loss of the Presidency in 2000.

Capone was brought down for unpaid taxes, not parking tickets, and that was as a result of a federal task force brought about following years of incredible gangland violence in Chicago.

I wouldn't call these bugs.

Re: Is Web3 anything?

#364

Post by throwaway405769 »

peoplefromibiza wrote: post #362
throwaway405769 wrote: post #361

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Laws are not ideal and are often used to discriminate against certain groups. > immagine this situation, Bob does the job, the other party never clicks on "done", Bob doesn't get the money, what Bob can do if there's no intermediary and/or bureaucracy protecting him? As I said, there is a period of funds lock-up. In the worst case, Bob has to wait some time until the smart contract sends him his payment.

> Laws are not ideal and are often used to discriminate against certain groups and your virtual ideology is better, how? since nobody can enforce anything. > As I said, there is a period of funds lock-up. In the worst case, Bob has to wait some time until the smart contract sends him his payment. What if they payment is never sent and "some time" is forever? You need laws after all (AKA a solution outside of the chai…

>and your virtual ideology is better, how?

Virtual ideology? Also, does the word permissionless ring a bell?

>What if they payment is never sent and "some time" is forever?

You have no idea how smart contracts work, do you?

Re: Is Web3 anything?

#365

Post by tracyhenry »

timdaub wrote: post #198
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.

How can a database achieve observability to anyone?

just make it openly accessible...

Re: Is Web3 anything?

#366

Post by nefitty »

CryptoPunk wrote: post #345
nefitty wrote: post #130

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So like, if you don't deliver those shipping containers of hot sauce, I just click the "I was scammed" checkbox on my smart contract dashboard? Where exactly does the leverage of smart contracts come into play? The biggest reason libertarianism is a nonstarter is that it outright rejects the state monopoly on violence. Without a lone arbiter, societies fragment due to intragroup competition and violence. As a society…

Libertarianism != anarchism. It does NOT reject the state's monopoly on violence. It argues it should be used sparingly https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2016/06/enforci...

To clarify, from my understanding, in a libertarian society, individuals and groups would be able to hire armed mercenary groups a la private security forces, but with presumably less regulation. That's what I mean by "monopoly on violence", eg only the ruling government has the right to use violence to enforce contracts.

Re: Is Web3 anything?

#367

Post by dang »

Shadonototra wrote: post #348

[flagged]

Users flagged this submission. I didn't see it until now.

Please don't post this sort of rhetoric to HN. It's boring and almost always based on false assumptions (as in this case).

Edit: and could you please stop posting unsubstantive comments to HN generally? You've been doing it repeatedly, unfortunately, and we ban that sort of account—it's not what the site is for.

https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

Re: Is Web3 anything?

#368

Post by peoplefromibiza »

throwaway405769 wrote: post #364
peoplefromibiza wrote: post #362

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Laws are not ideal and are often used to discriminate against certain groups and your virtual ideology is better, how? since nobody can enforce anything. > As I said, there is a period of funds lock-up. In the worst case, Bob has to wait some time until the smart contract sends him his payment. What if they payment is never sent and "some time" is forever? You need laws after all (AKA a solution outside of the chai…

>and your virtual ideology is better, how? Virtual ideology? Also, does the word permissionless ring a bell? >What if they payment is never sent and "some time" is forever? You have no idea how smart contracts work, do you?

> Also, does the word permissionless ring a bell?

a door with no lock it's perrmissionless

how does this solve the issue of authoritarian governments?

> You have no idea how smart contracts work, do you?

I was writing smart contracts in solidity in 2015

at least it was something new back then...

but back on topic, what if they payment is never sent and "some time" is forever?

can you tell me what tools can the poor Bob use to claim what is legitimately his in your perrmissionless world?

how would you encode the "work completed" in a smart contract?

should nodes run by people in the Philipines vote on Bob's work, when Bob lives in Yowa and only wanted to be paid for keeping the gardens in his neighborhood clean (as per job description)?

Re: Is Web3 anything?

#369

Post by shams93 »

Ultimately you do have an issue with who controls the browser. You would think that web3 people would invest in Firefox so that you do not have a duopoly owning the browser space between apple and google.

Re: Is Web3 anything?

#370

Post by josaka »

astoor wrote: post #231
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…

I'd also add that one of the big fallacies/deceits of blockchain is that it does not allow trustless transactions as the article author suggests, it simply shifts the trust. In the author's example of gathering funds to renovate a neighbourhood park, you'd still need to trust that the contract developers hadn't made a unfixable bug or deliberate backdoor, you'd still have to trust your neighbours to not screw up when…

True, but there's value in reducing the number of parties you must trust to get something done. It's easy to imagine that, at the margin, there are a subset of collective action problems that will get solved if you can reduce the number of parties that must be trusted. Worrying about the need to sue 3 people has to be better than worrying about the need to sue 6.
Post reply on HN