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

371–380 of 442 posts

Re: Is Web3 anything?

#371

Post by josaka »

jgilias wrote: post #112
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…

Also, it's important to realize the core reason why people trust the government with these things. It's because the government has the ability to actually _enforce_ the contracts if required. I mean, having a deed of owning some property on the blockchain is all cool and dandy. Provided that the polity where the property is located recognizes this. Otherwise you're still trespassing.

I think the sweet spot for some blockchain use cases is where contract enforcement doesn't work well. It's really hard to seek redress for diffuse, low-grade breach. A 10 million people with one dollar in damages are less likely to be made whole than 1 person with 10 million in damages. And contract enforcement often fails in insolvency. Try enforcing a how warranty against a builder that's gone bankrupt.

Re: Is Web3 anything?

#372

Post by throwaway405769 »

peoplefromibiza wrote: post #368
throwaway405769 wrote: post #364

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>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 B…

I think you're being disingenuous since it's hard to believe that you still don't understand this.

1. Alice hires Bob to do a job.

2. Alice deposits money into the timelocked escrow smart contract.

3. Bob signals that the job is done.

4. If Alice signals that it's all good, Bob can withdraw his paycheck from the escrow.

5. If Alice is not happy with the job, she has predetermined amount of time to raise a dispute and get it settled, to decide whether Bob gets the money.

6. If Alice is not available for some reason and just disappears, Bob will still get his paycheck, although after waiting for the predetermined time.

Re: Is Web3 anything?

#373

Post by vmception »

mattlondon wrote: post #335
dikei wrote: post #276

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I guess when people say `trustless`, it means that they don't have to trust every single elements of the chain between you and your target: if any steps of the chain acting untruthfully, it would be detected by other steps thanks to the protocol they're using. Of course, with enough failures in the link, anything can be compromised.

But how do you know who is holding the phone/keyboard? If my phone is stolen and someone then sells my house and drains my bank accounts, how can I prove it was not me? The whole thing is built on sand. Suggesting that it is all verifiable etc is fine and dandy, but that is risky as the onus of proof falls to the victim. It is a bit like when Chip+Pin first came in for the UK way back when - there was this suggestion…

Hasty conclusion, but I am glad you put a traditional banking system to the same standard.

Beneath all incumbent banking processes and redundancies, money and value is a bearer instrument. If someone takes it, it is their's (with some extra steps for reintegration back into the economy necessary, sometimes). Redundancies have been built on top of it to improve that user experience.

Crypto assets have accomplished the bearer level. The commodity raw resource that people then built value transfer on top of, and then credit-velocity based money, and then banking systems compatible with that. In the crypto-asset sector, additional private businesses and sector wide redundancies will be built to improve that user experience. They have been built and many compete directly with each other, if you find them laughably inadequate then congratulations, you've identified a market need. Obviously the conclusion that it is fundamentally and irreconcilably flawed and 'built on sand' won't necessarily motivate you to fulfill the market need, but others are motivated by it.

Re: Is Web3 anything?

#374

Post by tomp »

costac wrote: 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…

Government has a monopoly.

Web3 (blockchain or not... the important feature is decentralisation) enables choice of governance - you can pick the "neutral third party". This destroys the governance monopoly and creates a marketplace.

Re: Is Web3 anything?

#375

Post by tomp »

pengwing wrote: post #8
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…

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

Now you have to trust the lawyer that created your contract, as well as the court that might enforce it.

Re: Is Web3 anything?

#376

Post by peoplefromibiza »

throwaway405769 wrote: post #372
peoplefromibiza wrote: post #368

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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 B…

I think you're being disingenuous since it's hard to believe that you still don't understand this. 1. Alice hires Bob to do a job. 2. Alice deposits money into the timelocked escrow smart contract. 3. Bob signals that the job is done. 4. If Alice signals that it's all good, Bob can withdraw his paycheck from the escrow. 5. If Alice is not happy with the job, she has predetermined amount of time to raise a dispute and…

> to raise a dispute and get it settled, to decide whether Bob gets the money.

who decides?

and how?

and what are the consequences for Bob and Alice?

and what happens if Alice or Bob are not happy with the verdict?

> Alice is not available for some reason and just disappears, Bob will still get his paycheck

it's fun you don't see any problem and think of this as an acceptable solution, even if it fails in its most basic form.

You can only hire someone for a job if you have the money.

In reality many people hire someone for a job and thanks to their help they'll have the money to repay them in the future.

Money that at the beginning they do not possess.

Basically credit does not exist in your world, but you still think that it's better for the poor folks.

But what if Alice disappeared because she's dead, and Bob id the one who killed her?

do you ever stop to think about real life?

genuinely curious.

(not to sound harsh, but you just reinvented escrow accounts, in a more complex way...)

Re: Is Web3 anything?

#377

Post by throwaway405769 »

peoplefromibiza wrote: post #376
throwaway405769 wrote: post #372

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think you're being disingenuous since it's hard to believe that you still don't understand this. 1. Alice hires Bob to do a job. 2. Alice deposits money into the timelocked escrow smart contract. 3. Bob signals that the job is done. 4. If Alice signals that it's all good, Bob can withdraw his paycheck from the escrow. 5. If Alice is not happy with the job, she has predetermined amount of time to raise a dispute and…

> to raise a dispute and get it settled, to decide whether Bob gets the money. who decides? and how? and what are the consequences for Bob and Alice? and what happens if Alice or Bob are not happy with the verdict? > Alice is not available for some reason and just disappears, Bob will still get his paycheck it's fun you don't see any problem and think of this as an acceptable solution, even if it fails in its most ba…

>who decides? and how

I was talking about Kleros at the beginning of the discussion, but it's just one possible option.

>You can only hire someone for a job if you have the money.

No, you can only hire someone for a job using this specific method if you have the money beforehand. This means that Bob can be 100% sure that his employer is capable of paying him.

>In reality many people hire someone for a job and thanks to their help they'll have the money to repay them in the future.

There can be other smart contracts which allow this. The cool thing about them is that Bob is always fully aware whether his employer has the funds to pay him or it's just an IOU.

>But what if Alice disappeared because she's dead, and Bob id the one who killed her?

This is outside of our threat model. We're designing a smart contract for employing a freelancer, not high value SC where murder would be economically viable. If Bob murders Alice this is handled the same way as any other murder.

Re: Is Web3 anything?

#378

Post by wbsss4412 »

costac wrote: 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 think you’ve really nailed it here.

Libertarianism is so strong in the tech world that people have blinders on.

Re: Is Web3 anything?

#379

Post by atty »

tomp wrote: post #374
costac wrote: 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…

Government has a monopoly. Web3 (blockchain or not... the important feature is decentralisation ) enables choice of governance - you can pick the "neutral third party". This destroys the governance monopoly and creates a marketplace.

But government laws and regulations still have precedence over smart contracts or blockchain transactions. “But it’s written in the smart contract” is not a valid excuse for breaking the law of the country you reside in, and will be thrown out in any court. So instead of replacing one governance system with another, you’ve create a second, subservient system that is overruled by the first, have you not?

That’s the part I’ve never understood. Sure, you could use a blockchain that is anonymous to try and avoid scrutiny and legal trouble, but at that point you’re basically just a criminal.

Re: Is Web3 anything?

#380

Post by aardvarkr »

westoncb wrote: post #45
aardvarkr wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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

The way I see it: 1. many of the people doing originating work with the tech had deep understanding of the domain it applies to (and most software engineers to do not) 2. that gets diluted by people incentivized to shill for various reasons 3. so now we're not "in search of a problem" it's just been lost amid diverse noisy communication—and it's also defined in a domain unfamiliar to most programmers, so describing i…

If you can’t communicate this to programmers then good luck communicating the idea to a general audience.
Post reply on HN