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

The Web3 Fraud

usenix.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 377 posts

Re: The Web3 Fraud

#61

Post by throw_m239339 »

v64 wrote: post #13

Many criticisms of blockchain apps, comparing their use cases to conventional technologies (databases, conventional separation of services such as that described in the article, etc) all seem to miss a major point: Dapps running on the blockchain are immutable and highly resistant to being shutdown. Immutability is important because it's guaranteed that no matter how many times you interact with a contract address, y…

> Dapps running on the blockchain are immutable and highly resistant to being shutdown.

why the blockchain? There are other peer to peer tech that do not involve the blockchain, if your goal is avoiding being shutdown or censored.

Re: The Web3 Fraud

#62

Post by throwaway_2009 »

toomuchtodo wrote: post #14
endisneigh wrote: post #5

I don’t understand what problem web3 can solve that a trusted entity cannot. And let’s keep in mind your reply to this comment will be using a trusted entity. In fact in the history of the internet I cannot find a single example of any technology working better in a decentralized fashion compared to centralized for the end user

Hot take: The proponents of decentralized systems feel disenfranchised by those who own and govern centralized systems, therefore decentralized systems are their way around what they consider injustice. It is a grasp for control and power where they feel they have none. They don’t feel they have a seat at the table, so they argue for building their own table, which is, naturally, “superior” to the existing table (why…

Nah, it's about censorship-free finance vs censorable finance.

If not for AML, KYC and basically the fact you just can't really use cash any more in significant sums for anything we wouldn't have had to bother.

I have 200,000 bitcoin, or maybe I have 0.2, no-one knows other than me. Good.

Re: The Web3 Fraud

#63

Post by selestify »

jjnoakes wrote: post #49
selestify wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The person you're replying to has already addressed your points: > Yes, blockchains are slower and more expensive. This is the current cost of enabling the two facets above. If we're not comparing blockchain dapps to other systems that offer the same assurances, then we're comparing apples and oranges. Could you please respond more meaningfully to the conversation?

I thought I did... That quoted paragraph doesn't negate my point which is that I do get the same (or very similar) assurances elsewhere, so I think the comparison is valid.

Ah my bad, I thought you were focusing on the features rather than the assurances. I'll respond to the other comment you made.

Re: The Web3 Fraud

#64

Post by dogecoinbase »

meowkit wrote: post #18

> So I still need a DNS name, Ethereum Name Service (ENS) https://forkast.news/what-is-ens-ethereum-name-service-how-d... > After all, a programmer doing the most basic test of a web3 prototype is going to need to get the cryptocurrency, spend the cryptocurrency, and any application will require all users to get the cryptocurrency as well. If this gets abandoned quickly due to the inevitable technical failure “web3”…

> or some of the long term ethos of the crypto developer community.

Do you mean "the code is the contract unless the contract would cause a substantial number of wealthy stakeholders to lose money, in which case the code is no longer the contract" (a stance, I might add, that is _formalized_ by PoS systems, if anyone ever manages to get one online)?

Re: The Web3 Fraud

#65

Post by endisneigh »

mannerheim wrote: post #26
endisneigh wrote: post #5

I don’t understand what problem web3 can solve that a trusted entity cannot. And let’s keep in mind your reply to this comment will be using a trusted entity. In fact in the history of the internet I cannot find a single example of any technology working better in a decentralized fashion compared to centralized for the end user

> In fact in the history of the internet I cannot find a single example of any technology working better in a decentralized fashion compared to centralized for the end user Torrents?

You think torrents are a better way to distribute files compared to alternatives?

Re: The Web3 Fraud

#66

Post by selestify »

Misdicorl wrote: post #59
v64 wrote: post #13

Many criticisms of blockchain apps, comparing their use cases to conventional technologies (databases, conventional separation of services such as that described in the article, etc) all seem to miss a major point: Dapps running on the blockchain are immutable and highly resistant to being shutdown. Immutability is important because it's guaranteed that no matter how many times you interact with a contract address, y…

Unless there is a killer feature it enables, it's an implementation detail and I don't care. And I will gladly compare other solutions against blockchain despite not having the same implementation detail you claim puts it above comparison. And so will everyone else that isn't blinded by fanaticism.

Do you feel the same about Tor? That the anonymity is an implementation detail and you don't care?

Re: The Web3 Fraud

#67

Post by v64 »

DannyBee wrote: post #50
v64 wrote: post #13

Many criticisms of blockchain apps, comparing their use cases to conventional technologies (databases, conventional separation of services such as that described in the article, etc) all seem to miss a major point: Dapps running on the blockchain are immutable and highly resistant to being shutdown. Immutability is important because it's guaranteed that no matter how many times you interact with a contract address, y…

The problem you cite doesn't seem so common, or so large, that it is worth changing literally the entire architecture of everything over. Maybe it will be someday, but it definitely isn't today, nor does it seem to be happening particularly soon! Until developers feel like that day is coming, this neither makes sense, nor will it go anywhere. (as an aside, the non-payment one seems kind of silly, since the blockchain…

> (as an aside, the non-payment one seems kind of silly, since the blockchain apps don't work without payment either - network fees, etc. Sometimes they are covered, sometimes not)

There's a subtle difference here though: So long as I use AWS, I'm responsible for funding the account, and my non-payment means the app goes down. I have to continue to pay for the app to run, even if no one uses it.

On a blockchain, once I've deployed my app, I can walk away and never think about the app again. I only have to pay for the initial deployment of the contract without any further ongoing cost. The app will always be there ready to be used by an end user who's willing to pay to interact with it.

Re: The Web3 Fraud

#68

Post by nraynaud »

I’m not a crypto bro, but I don’t think it’s fair to criticize a prototype on its cost. Airplanes were very bad at the beginning. I think the valid criticism would be if there is some kind of physical limitation that prevents the system from evolving to something useful (think of the rocket equation, the ratio of useful mass/propellant is stuck at a ridiculous number).

Re: The Web3 Fraud

#69

Post by PaulDavisThe1st »

SubiculumCode wrote: post #9
nihonde wrote: post #6

You reach for Web3 when your requirements include: (a) self-sovereign ID/auth, and/or (b) hosted materials that can't be censored via a centralized hosting provider. Horses for courses. ps. Does he think Web3 is about storing data on the blockchain network? It's not. Ex. https://ceramic.network/

Sometimes bloggers gotta blog, even when they just know a little bit and are just regurgitating an iteration of their preconceived notions. Edit: Of course you get voted down because you make a substantive comment. Welcome to Hacker News' Crytpo Hater Crowd.

You know what Carl Sagan said about Bozo the clown?

> "The fact that some geniuses were laughed at does not imply that all who are laughed at are geniuses. They laughed at Columbus, they laughed at Fulton, they laughed at the Wright Brothers. But they also laughed at Bozo the Clown."

Sometimes, Haters Gonna Hate and there's nothing more to it. But sometimes, Haters hate because they and you should hate what they hate, and one day, it will be clear to all. Problem is, of course, knowing if we're talking the equivalent of powered flight or Bozo the clown.

Re: The Web3 Fraud

#70

Post by pavlov »

ar7hur wrote: post #10

This article misses the point, it sees web3 decentralization as purely technical and makes performance comparisons with existing systems. The power of web3 decentralization is about control, not more powerful computing. Yes your raspberry pi runs faster than the EVM, but can you give me any guarantee about what code it runs?

The comparison between Raspberry Pi and EVM is off by many, many orders of magnitude.

What Ethereum marketing likes to call a “global supercomputer” is slower than a 1950s computer built out of vacuum tubes, and running programs is more expensive than it was in 1955. (Programming ergonomics are also nearly punch card level.)

There are very few applications you’d actually want to execute on a platform like that. And every attempt to improve the design (including the long-promised PoS transition) is going to turn it into a centralized plutocracy.

It’s a fascinating science experiment that doesn’t have much purpose as an application environment. But because people are stubborn and the marketing was successful enough, “blockchain” is to this decade what “object-oriented” was in 1990s: a token gesture towards it will make managers and journalists happy.

Post reply on HN