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

81–90 of 377 posts

Re: The Web3 Fraud

#81

Post by bytebln »

serverholic wrote: post #30

This has got to be trolling. Almost every point is nonsense or at best uninformed vitriol. I literally don't know where to start with a comment so I'll just make a series of points related to claims in the article. Nobody has ever claimed that you can run normal computer programs on the Ethereum blockchain. It isn't meant to run fucking Doom. Smart-contracts are more like financial protocols. Blockchains are a form o…

According to NFTs: https://www.reddit.com/r/OutOfTheLoop/comments/rho91b/whats_...

Re: The Web3 Fraud

#82

Post by smoldesu »

selestify wrote: post #66
Misdicorl wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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?

Tor has actual websites and functionality. Web3 has venture capital and some randomized apes.

Re: The Web3 Fraud

#83

Post by evan_ »

josephmoniz wrote: post #17

As a 13 year old programmer learning to code in 2005, transferring money online seemed impossible, this was pre-stripe after all. A 13 year old getting a bank partnership or a payment processor deal seemed a bit out of reach as well. These days though, sending money online via stable coins like $USDC over a fast and cheap block chain like Solana, Polygon, avalanche, etc is not only possible but flat out inevitable.

13 year olds used PayPal in 2005 just like everyone else.

Re: The Web3 Fraud

#84

Post by Uptrenda »

serverholic wrote: post #30

This has got to be trolling. Almost every point is nonsense or at best uninformed vitriol. I literally don't know where to start with a comment so I'll just make a series of points related to claims in the article. Nobody has ever claimed that you can run normal computer programs on the Ethereum blockchain. It isn't meant to run fucking Doom. Smart-contracts are more like financial protocols. Blockchains are a form o…

This is how I feel whenever I read a 'blockchain is scam.. is broken.. is a fraud' article. Everyone wants to put their 2 cents in and jump on the criticism train to seem like le technical experts. Over reading the same fallacious and tired arguments. I haven't seen anyone make an original point for some time now.

Re: The Web3 Fraud

#85

Post by DannyBee »

selestify wrote: post #38
jjnoakes wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I get mostly the same features with self-hosted and local traditional apps for a fraction of the price and much lower general financial risk as well.

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?

They didn't address the points - they tried to say nobody gets to compare other things unless they do . Which is wrong.

Re: The Web3 Fraud

#86

Post by vmception »

jjnoakes wrote: post #25
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…

I get mostly the same features with self-hosted and local traditional apps for a fraction of the price and much lower general financial risk as well.

If blockchain is more expensive than cloud for you, the person that launched the product, then you architected your project wrong

Blockchain products are write once, read free, persist forever for free.

Your users pay to interact. Every SaaS funnel person knows that of you get users to pay at all then you have filtered the funnel to larger payments already. Blockchakn projects are that funnel in warp speed.

Re: The Web3 Fraud

#87

Post by SilasX »

selestify wrote: post #47
H8crilA wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is great, but I don't need it at 10^9 times the cost. Imagine if a single red apple costed about $100M, yet it had rather unique qualities such as indisputable, provable lack of contamination. That's the kind of cost difference we're talking about here.

Good for you. Not everyone needs to use Tor -- slow and inefficient, can't even do a proper 1080p livestream. Good for them. But some people are willing to pay 10^9 the cost for certain guarantees. Good for them too, that such options now exist. Why the irrational hate?

You’re making good points, but from this comment[1] and stuff like

>Why the irrational hate?

you’re coming off as too mean and I think you’d do well to avoid that tone.

[1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29587901

Re: The Web3 Fraud

#88

Post by jjnoakes »

miracle2k wrote: post #78
jjnoakes wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I get mostly the same features with self-hosted and local traditional apps for a fraction of the price and much lower general financial risk as well.

But no one else can use your app with the same guarantees you give to yourself, while also being able to share state with you.

Is that true though? If two people run self hosted apps that can communicate, all you have to verify is the data passing between. What assurances are you missing?

Re: The Web3 Fraud

#89

Post by DesiLurker »

fabrice_d wrote: post #34
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?

You could, if the code came from a signed blob that is verified. No need for a blockchain to allow that, it's basically what Mobile OSes are doing, and with multisig you can verify both the developer and the OS vendor.

well then you are trusting the signer, that is the ultimate promise of decentralization. especially coupled with deterministic builds by gcc you could have a end-to-end verified firmware running on a device.

Re: The Web3 Fraud

#90

Post by _aavaa_ »

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

The entire point is to remove the trusted entity. To build a way of doing things that isn’t dependent on trusted entities to work. That’s it.
Post reply on HN