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

Why Web3?

avc.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

291–300 of 706 posts

Re: Why Web3?

#291

Post by kpommerenke »

raesene9 wrote: post #107
galaxyLogic wrote: post #98

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Good questions. Let's say I create a piece of digital art and create an NFT out of it. The NFT somehow starts increasing in value. Then I copy my original digital art-asset and perhaps use a Photo-Shop filter to make it have a different hue. I turn that into another NFT. And I keep on doing this for all colors of the rainbow. What prevents me from creating new NFTs with the same or slightly modified underlying digita…

In many cases you don't even need to modify it. Ownership of an NFT often does not provide copyright on the original image ( https://www.wipo.int/wipo_magazine/en/2021/04/article_0007.h... has some interesting details on what you do and don't get with an NFT). So if you made the original image, you can just mint a new NFT of that image and sell it. Heck you can mint as many NFTs as you like of any image you own the c…

Why do I need to own the copyright to mint an NFT of the image?

Re: Why Web3?

#292

Post by jaredsohn »

nfw2 wrote: post #282
root_axis wrote: post #68

I'm not convinced. People talk grand about "permissionless data" but I fail to see any practical applications. NFTs are a scam and are retroactively obsoleted by digital signatures. All of the ideas about logistics tracking, deed tracking, etc etc are all rendered pointless by the oracle problem, you can get identical guarantees with digital signatures minus the blockchain. DeFi is DOA. Gas fees are insane, "layer 2"…

Do digital signatures really make the blockchain obsolete if they fill the same niche? Even if blockchain are technically equivalent to digital signatures, it seems like it has some real advantages from a business perspective: - it is capturing the market of people who want to buy "official" digital assets and is becoming the de facto way to do so - the market is one that should have strong network effects - gaining…

>But I also find sneaker and stamp collectors equally perplexing,

People for the most part don't get rich off of stamps. Is more of a hobby than an investment.

Re: Why Web3?

#293

Post by tfang17 »

Wonder what Fred thinks about having a single-shared database (Ethereum) vs. having multiple shared databases (SOLUNAVAX).

Re: Why Web3?

#294

Post by nfw2 »

aquateen wrote: post #265
nfw2 wrote: post #255

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Maybe it's not common wisdom in general, but it is a pretty common viewpoint in the startup world. Building products is expensive, and startups can't afford to build something no one wants. It's pretty much universal advise that finding an initial market fit should be the first priority of any new startup. Literally making a sale before the product exists is the extreme end of that philosophy. Whether or not this is…

I've been on this website a long time and I suppose the userbase has grown quite a bit. I don't assume everyone has read all of Paul Graham's articles or even know who he is, but are you familiar with how YCombinator works? Enough money to survive on ramen for a few months and build a demo. Get feedback from users and iterate over and over.

I know multiple people personally who have been through YC, and I'm not sure what point you are trying to make.

Not every company that goes through YC are at the same stage. I've heard of companies joining YC despite already having over a million in ARR because of how valuable the YC network is.

YC invests 125k in each team, which is certainly enough to last more than a few months eating ramen if you are building the product yourself.

Also, trying to sell a product using a demo is not exactly the same as selling a finished product. At 0-1 stage, you can bet the demo hides the rough edges to some degree.

I would say selling using a demo falls somewhere on the sell-before-build spectrum, but one point I was trying to make is that it is not necessarily black-and-white.

Re: Why Web3?

#295

Post by corobo »

undeadsushi wrote: post #159

Yes the marketing is annoying, but have you actually experimented with the world of Web3. Have you played with defi, bought in early any gaming tokens? The fact that all of this can happen on-chain where it's completely transparent is really unique. It's why there has been so many companies explode into the 50M-100M revenue range in 2021 - https://consensys.net/reports/web3-report-q3-2021/

No, can't afford it

Re: Why Web3?

#296

Post by [deleted] »

jaredsohn wrote: post #292
nfw2 wrote: post #282

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do digital signatures really make the blockchain obsolete if they fill the same niche? Even if blockchain are technically equivalent to digital signatures, it seems like it has some real advantages from a business perspective: - it is capturing the market of people who want to buy "official" digital assets and is becoming the de facto way to do so - the market is one that should have strong network effects - gaining…

>But I also find sneaker and stamp collectors equally perplexing, People for the most part don't get rich off of stamps. Is more of a hobby than an investment.

[deleted]

Re: Why Web3?

#297

Post by Lordarminius »

threeseed wrote: post #285
closetnerd wrote: post #192

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is often not necessarily the case. For web3 - I'm still waiting to figure out what problem it can solve meaningfully.

> I'm still waiting to figure out what problem it can solve meaningfully Money laundering and other criminal behaviour. Many of the things we spent decades trying to remove from the financial system will come roaring back in. Of course it will come courtesy of young, wealthy, educated IT guys who are the least exposed to any financial shocks.

If you want to hate on crypto, that's your prerogative but stop using the old, tired, false argument about money laundering. It is easier to launder money through the legacy financial system than through cryptocurrency. In fact, financial institutions and businesses do it all the time.

Re: Why Web3?

#298

Post by maybecrypto »

unicornmama wrote: post #202
ThomPete wrote: post #197

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The crypto community does what every startup should do. They find the customers before they start building i.e. they build community first and in effect build products. To say that things aren't being build in the crypto community is simply flat out false. It's one of the fastest developing industries and more and more talent are leaving their previous jobs or industries.

Talent is pouring in because free money is gushing out from the mother of all bubbles. Enjoy it while it lasts.

Applies to me - leaving enterprise infrastructure for crypto. I think the tech is mostly useless, but the hype is real, the VC dollars are real. I want to try to capitalize on this.

Re: Why Web3?

#299

Post by threeseed »

throw_nbvc1234 wrote: post #143
galaxyLogic wrote: post #89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> introducing artificial tokens, quietly giving a huge number of those tokens to founders and early investors (in exchange for actual money, of course), and then hyping the platform to the moon so everyone can cash out their tokens to a new wave of speculators. In other words a Ponzi-scheme

It's a ponzi-scheme if there's no value behind the hype. it's not inherently a ponzi scheme. It's the same way in the current private equity start-up world just that only VC's and connected individuals are exposed to the all the risk and all the profit.

> It's a ponzi-scheme if there's no value behind the hype

But what's the value ?

I am still after a few years now trying to understand what it actually is.

Re: Why Web3?

#300

Post by cercatrova »

ipaddr wrote: post #254
cercatrova wrote: post #234

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's what I commonly see on startup fora including HN, reddit, IndieHackers etc. There's books about this method like Lean Startup, Mom Test and so on. The advice to build first and market later is actually advice that is much maligned in my experience, as there are too many stories of engineers who build and then find out they can't actually sell their product because they focused too much on the building and not en…

The approach to validate ideas with conversation with your target market when you are unsure if anyone will buy. But in this case you need to validate it by building it and proving it can be done. The market is already prepped.

> in this case

In which case, Web3? If so, I don't think the market is prepped at all, I don't really see people using it for what proponents say it'll be used for. If some other case, please elucidate me, I'm not sure what you're referring to otherwise.

Post reply on HN