The Web3 Fraud • Hacker News Board

Re: The Web3 Fraud

#131

Post by dredmorbius » Fri, Dec 17, 2021, 5:14 AM UTC

Animats wrote: post #32

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 Usenet.

That scaled to about 100k active users from a highly-gated potential community of about 1 million and was replaced by ... centralised systems.

Usenet itself was more centralised in most regards than Reddit is today. And even then it proved nonviable.

Re: The Web3 Fraud

#132

Post by DannyBee » Fri, Dec 17, 2021, 5:14 AM UTC

sb057 wrote: post #92

Something that I think a lot of Web3 (and metaverse, et al) proponent types don't understand is that you can't plan out a revolutionary technology. By definition, any wide-reaching society-wide overturning of the current order will behave in ways you can't anticipate. For example, HTTP code 402 "Payment Required" was standardized in 1999 when the W3C anticipated that people would be paying for things over the web, bu…

I mean, this is true, but it feels like there is a more basic issue of product/market fit here.

Even given the comments here about what this stuff is supposed to provide, it's really unclear anyone did even basic diligence. Something as simple as "we went around to different focus groups of developers and said "what are your biggest problems and pain points".

Things like "immutability" and "not being shut down" would not be the top 2 for most groups of developers, and i'd bet not in the top 10, either.

As a result, every time i hear about "web3" i can't stop hearing the simpsons clip where Stephen Hawking says "i wanted to see your utopia, but now i see it is more of a fruitopia"

Don't get me wrong, there are certainly types of apps, etc out there where they are going to say "being shut down" is their biggest problem, but that seems like a really small portion of the total addressable market.

Re: The Web3 Fraud

#133

Post by jfrunyon » Fri, Dec 17, 2021, 5:14 AM UTC

mediocregopher wrote: post #27

The reason I'm hyped about crypto (which in this article seems to be incorrectly equated to "web3") is because of the new possibilities it brings. The reason I put my money into stupid shit in crypto is because I don't know if it will work or not, but I'm excited to know if it will. Some of it does, most doesn't. I learn, progress has been made. Imagine a whole new continent is discovered, and all the people back hom…

> Some of it does, most doesn't

I don't know of anything in crypto which actually works (read: does something better/cheaper than pre-existing technologies). The single value of it is speculation.

Re: The Web3 Fraud

#134

Post by riffic » Fri, Dec 17, 2021, 5:14 AM UTC

It'd be great if USENIX as an organization had a Fediverse presence, thereby showing their commitment to an open web.

by the way, shameless plug for /r/Web3Skepticism, where we take a long hard look at this "ecosystem", question its benefits and examine its failings.

Re: The Web3 Fraud

#135

Post by marcan_42 » Fri, Dec 17, 2021, 5:15 AM UTC

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.

As a 14 year old programmer and tinkerer in 2004, I had no problem buying a Helium-Neon laser for an experiment and paying via PayPal.

As an 18 year old tinkerer and hacker in 2008, I had no problem signing up to take payments via PayPal and running a little side thing selling home-assembled widgets out of my bedroom.

And as horrible as PayPal is, cryptocurrencies have even more friction and risk.

Re: The Web3 Fraud

#136

Post by jjordan » Fri, Dec 17, 2021, 5:15 AM UTC

Looks like the daily "hate on web3" article has arrived. Yes, there are problems that need solving in blockchain / crypto / web3. We're doing something that has never been done before, i.e. building censorship resistant trustless systems. It's come a long way but it also has a long way to go before its potential is fulfilled. I don't know that a daily thread of people complaining about well known issues in the space is useful.

Re: The Web3 Fraud

#137

Post by Elegant-Ad2200 » Fri, Dec 17, 2021, 5:15 AM UTC

v64 wrote: post #21

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 For many use cases, BitTorrent is a superior file distribution mechanism compared to centralized alternatives.

Would it still be a superior system if you had to pay some amount to every person you download from for the bandwidth you're using? That seems to be the case with web3, unless I'm completely misunderstanding how it works.

Re: The Web3 Fraud

#138

Post by gfodor » Fri, Dec 17, 2021, 5:15 AM UTC

mwattsun wrote: post #104

selestify wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's definitely a worry for people doing illegal businesses, for example all the drug markets. Depending on your political allegiances, that's either a good thing or a bad thing, but either way, real value is being created for some people here. It's also a worry for people who are traditionally blocked from doing business -- for example, anyone who's got some sanctions placed on them. Again, could be a good thing or…

Hopefully, the number of people you are talking about is fairly small, or maybe I'm just out of touch with the rise of crime and corruption on the dark web - but I wouldn't lose any sleep if they got shut down. I'm fairly libertarian about drug use, but there's a lot of other terrible stuff that is enabled along with drugs in this system.

Well, you don't have to like the criminals of today, but lets also not forget that good people are deemed criminals under repressive regimes, for crimes such as "watching K-Pop."

https://www.nytimes.com/2021/12/15/world/asia/north-korea-kp...

Re: The Web3 Fraud

#139

Post by toomuchtodo » Fri, Dec 17, 2021, 5:16 AM UTC

systemvoltage wrote: post #115

toomuchtodo wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’m am specially speaking about blockchains, cryptocurrencies, NFTs, and the like, not IPFS, DHTs, or improvements to existing internet technologies (mutable torrents, webtorrent) to support decentralized storage, discovery, or name resolution. The “web3” nomenclature throws it all together, which is annoying. DeFi =! Dweb

I feel the same as you do about cryptocurrencies and NFTs.

My apologies for talking past each other.

Re: The Web3 Fraud

#140

Post by Elegant-Ad2200 » Fri, Dec 17, 2021, 5:16 AM UTC

menzoic wrote: post #23

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

Establishing yourself as a trusted entity is a huge barrier to entry. Decentralized, trustless systems allow small teams with little to no money achieve things that only institutions and heavily funded companies could do in the past. Technologies like blockchain are a great accelerator for innovations in this area and will also spark a new category of use cases that weren't possible before.

Is the immense cost cited in the article not a barrier to entry?