Why Web3? • Hacker News Board

Re: Why Web3?

#611

Post by unicornmama » Thu, Dec 30, 2021, 11:44 AM UTC

ThomPete wrote: post #610

unicornmama wrote: post #568

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Talent doesn't have problem making money No where else in my career have I seen senior level engineers earn 7 figures. > talent is attracted to interesting problems and id attracting the money First part is fair, top engineers are passionate about solving challenges. Second part not so much. How can you explain that “interesting problems” is an efficient capital allocation strategy? Money is interested in making mo…

If BTC is your idea of a failure, being the catalyst for a +2 trillion dollar industry, then i guess failure isnt bad at all. Again you are just claiming things ignoring everything else. Lifes too short for haters. good luck

Your arguments, much like your head, are full of hot air.

Re: Why Web3?

#612

Post by unicornmama » Thu, Dec 30, 2021, 11:45 AM UTC

ThomPete wrote: post #609

maybecrypto wrote: post #341

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think the current token prices are a bubble, but I think the space itself is here to stay.

if the space is here to stay so is the token price, in fact we haven't even begun seeing the gains as almost no one is in this field yet.

Do you get paid to write these fluff pieces?

Re: Why Web3?

#613

Post by grey-area » Thu, Dec 30, 2021, 11:46 AM UTC

miracle2k wrote: post #581

grey-area wrote: post #566

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And yet all the talk is not about the signature, but the thing it refers to. Why is that distinction constantly elided? Is it because the digital signature has no value on its own?

It's because there is no other meaningful way to "own" the thing the signature refers to, if you apply a concept of ownership as you would to a physical piece of art. Being in physical possession of the bytes to a JPEG is not what gives people the sense that they own this piece of art in the way they might own a painting, because the bytes are so cheaply copied. Owning the intellectual property behind a JPEG is an en…

Of course there are other ways to meaningfully own the digital artwork, you listed some in your response:

You created the image. You own the copyright to the image (which has legal weight). You may restrict distribution or reproduction in those situations.

These are all more meaningfully ownership than owning a digital receipt on the blockchain pointing to a url on a 3rd party site, which is more akin to buying a star or a piece of the moon from somebody who sets up a website and purports to be selling these ineffable things.

I disagree with you about the point of NFTs, the point of them IMO is to provide cover for ponzi schemes and convince marks parting with their cash that they are buying into a get rich quick scheme in which they'll get rich and someone else will be left holding the bag when they sell their receipt for digital art to someone else.

The references to art markets, asset tracking, provenance, new technology etc etc are just indirection used to distract from the fundamental transaction - give me money (including really high transaction fees for the marketplace) for this worthless receipt which says you own* this digital lion pic, unique amongst thousands of other similar lion pics because it has a cigar or an eye patch. No wonder companies like Nike, Games companies and football clubs and are rushing to take part too and sell fans NFTs, they can't lose!

* For certain values of own not conferring any rights over the image whatsoever.

Re: Why Web3?

#614

Post by omandi » Thu, Dec 30, 2021, 12:33 PM UTC

Before I heard about web3, I started thinking about some of the same questions that are trying to be answered by web3. How can I start using systems where I own my data and control access to it via tools? Is it possible to shift towards tools that can use my data in a common format but allow me to switch tools? What should be free and what do I pay for? What is identity - how do I prove that I am who I say I am? Those are the questions I had before hearing about web3, so to me it has become an umbrella term to loosely define the conversation space about these questions (and many other related ones that I didn't originally have).

Re: Why Web3?

#615

Post by nonstickcoating » Thu, Dec 30, 2021, 12:35 PM UTC

capableweb wrote: post #66

jayd16 wrote: post #41

Can we stop talking about web3 unless we're talking about an actual spec, service or product?

Why? Web3 is an idea/concept, much like the web itself or the internet (neither are "an actual spec, service or product"), but we can still discuss the web and the internet no?

The Web and the Internet are the sum of it's protocols plus the infrastructure build on top of it plus the untangible social effects it has. This is true for Web3 as well, but the protocols are in their infancy, the infrastructure is sparse and the sociale effects (as of now) concentrated in the blockchain space. The parent comment wants to discuss those three topics (maybe minus the social implications) with regards to what amounts mostly to a buzzword right now, precisely because Web3's protocols, infrastructure and social implications are far to under developed to warrant serious discussion concerning long-time stable solutions to real-world problems. I sympathise with earlier comments, that would like to seperate Web3 from blockchain and crypto-coins precisely to discuss the possible merits or protocols actually fullfilling what the crypto space right now fails to deliver on.

Re: Why Web3?

#616

Post by yunohn » Thu, Dec 30, 2021, 12:51 PM UTC

jsemrau wrote: post #350

davidhariri wrote: post #84

> Frankly, it is all too much for me. Same. I've been actively unfollowing people on Twitter every day to clean my feeds of it. I'm not anti-web3 or anti-crypto, but I definitely don't need to read the same rhetoric from 100 people a day. Decentralized trust could be great, but I wonder how much time actually needs to be spent talking about it vs. actually building it...

Don't want to appear as spammy, but please have a look at my project finclout.io. Here people are incentivised to moderate and curate content. Thus supporting the build-up of trust and clout. The incentivces are coming through the monetary policy of the participating proof-of-stake chains, so it's not necessary to put money in to get money out. It's simply taking some of the economic value away from Google/FB. If you…

> It's simply taking some of the economic value away from Google/FB. If you look at their insane profit margins, it's worthwhile to attack.

I believe that you believe that Google/FB are competitors to your finclout.io.

But I think you are very confused about your business model versus Google/FB. Neither of them are doing what you do - you are competing with blogs and social media groups/channels that curate investment advice.

Re: Why Web3?

#617

Post by mendyberger » Thu, Dec 30, 2021, 12:58 PM UTC

dmitriid wrote: post #575

mendyberger wrote: post #412

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To all the people that downvoted my comment, do you think that decentralization is inherently connected to the Blockchain/NFT? If true, mind explaining?

Just shouting "BUT DECENTRALIZATION!" bears as much sense as "BUT BITCOIN". Decentralization doesn't have inherent value, and has a whole host of problems that cryptopeddlers don't want to either acknowledge or pretend to solve.

> Decentralization doesn't have inherent value

I think that when building the internet and the web, decentralization was assumed to have a lot of value, do you disagree with that?

Re: Why Web3?

#618

Post by ninkendo » Thu, Dec 30, 2021, 1:02 PM UTC

capableweb wrote: post #602

ninkendo wrote: post #245

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What other online tech communities are there out there that I can check out? If you say this is such a tiny one, I’d love to see the “bigger than HN” community you must be referring to.

Reddit, Twitter, other social media. But then there are (believe it or not) communities outside of the internet as well. Actual people working actual jobs in real life.

Twitter is an “online tech community”? I think we have different definitions of the term.

To elaborate, I think there’s too much non-tech people on social media for you to say that it’s a better representation of the “tech community” than HN. HN has at least some self-selection towards people who are interested in tech, whereas Twitter/FB/etc has way too much noise from non-tech uninformed crypto fetishists to say it’s representative of the “tech community”.

(That is not to say that non-tech people’s opinions don’t matter, or that twitter/FB/etc are not good places in general, but the subject of this thread of discussion is “what the tech community thinks of crypto/web3” and I don’t think “everyone on twitter” is great to use as a counter-example.)

Re: Why Web3?

#619

Post by dtonon » Thu, Dec 30, 2021, 1:05 PM UTC

thraxil wrote: post #607

FireInsight wrote: post #555

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Web3 has grown synonymous with blockchain. The things I really value in web3 are non-blockchain distributed systems. IPFS, Gun.js, heck, even BitTorrent could be considered web3. Most problems shouldn't be solved with blockchains. Crypto is what makes web3 artificially scarce.

I don't know about the others, but IPFS uses Filecoin, which is blockchain based.

This is not exact. Filecoin is built on the top of IPFS!

https://filecoin.io/build/

Re: Why Web3?

#620

Post by brightstep » Thu, Dec 30, 2021, 1:12 PM UTC

throwaway984393 wrote: post #458

brightstep wrote: post #246

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think there's a class of crypto believers who see "Web3" as a political movement, a way to dilute or break the power of institutions like e.g. the fed, Facebook, etc. To them, the grapevine is a secret sauce that will magically eliminate centralized power.

Which is ironic when you think about it. Those are the aims of Anarchist political philosophy, which is often anti-capitalist. So you could say Web3 is the "Capitalist-Anarchist Internet"

Yeah, I wouldn't be surprised to find a lot of AnCaps among Web3 advocates. I know there are also leftists who think it will challenge capitalism. Both parties are wrong to think a technology alone can make the changes they're looking for.