Web3 is centralized • Hacker News Board

Re: Web3 is centralized

#291

Post by CuriousCosmic » Sun, Jan 02, 2022, 1:49 PM UTC

lottin wrote: post #242

everfree wrote: post #110

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And also Aztec Network, and Tornado Cash, and Zcash, and soon Starkware, and... I'm surprised so many people on Hacker News apparently still believe that you can "see all transactions" on every blockchain. It really only takes some surface level research to find working, production blockchains/cryptocurrencies that use one of several types of cryptography to hide that data, plus if you're using a pseudonymous blockch…

Well, you have to see all transactions, in order to know the current balances on every wallet, in order to prevent double spending. This is, in fact, the whole principle on which blockchains operate.

There is no such requirement. The only requirement is that you be able to prove consistency and correctness of the ledger. The naive blockchain implementation needs transaction visibility but there isn't a hard requirement for it beyond that.

Monero uses a system that at a high level is referred to as Ring Signatures (it's not too complicated but it's more than I want to get into at the moment). Zcash and other networks use zero knowledge non-interactive proofs to prove consistency/correctness.

The major drawback of privacy preserving chains is that the transactions are expensive to compute due to all the maths that goes into maintaining that consistency without publicly leaking information. This isn't prohibitive for a desktop but a mobile phone will likely take a few minutes to build and send a transaction in the current environment (can be improved by HW acceleration or general HW improvements).

Re: Web3 is centralized

#292

Post by [deleted] » Sun, Jan 02, 2022, 1:55 PM UTC

Ambolia wrote: post #4

I don't know, seems kind of a stretch to say crypto is decentralized because everybody uses the same protocol. Is the IP protocol centralized too by that standard? On the other side yeah, most of the goals of decentralization could be achieved by looking at things like the Bittorrent / Pirate / Scihub projects which have been delivering content consistently in a distributed way for decades. A blockchain is only neces…

[deleted]

Re: Web3 is centralized

#293

Post by angio » Sun, Jan 02, 2022, 1:56 PM UTC

bpfrh wrote: post #257

angio wrote: post #201

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Look at it from the developer side, you (as a dev) cannot offer anything of you what you mentioned without government approval, but you can deploy a new yearn strategy to offer what GP mentioned. We can argue if that's good or bad, but for sure the latter is more decentralized since it doesn't require approval from a gatekeeper.

I would say that depends on the country you live in, but essentially you are saying web3 somehow doesn't get regulated and therefore is better. The reason you wouldn't be able to simply start a website offering people loans would be because of laws, I see no argument that if you somehow use a different technology it is suddenly legal.

I explicitly said I'm not sure it's better or worse (largely depends in which country you're living I guess), but it's undeniably more decentralized than the current situation.

Re: Web3 is centralized

#294

Post by cranx » Sun, Jan 02, 2022, 1:57 PM UTC

The problem is that everyone assumes crypto is some type of panacea. People keep saying transparency and distributed as keys words to engender an idea. People are believing the idea, but I’m skeptical the idea can “walk the walk.”

Could you show my grandmother how to see the transactions on the block chain easily for any crypto?

IMHO Web3 is more of an idea people are using to profit than a real thing to create equality.

Re: Web3 is centralized

#295

Post by btdmaster » Sun, Jan 02, 2022, 2:02 PM UTC

chx wrote: post #288

The problem with web3 is not that it's centralized -- that's irrelevant. The fundamental problem with all crypto"currencies" is as follows: the world uses real currencies and there is only one way this enters into the world of crypto"currencies": by someone selling a coin to someone else. Thus, regardless of what crypto"currency" we are talking about, it would be a zero sum game if not for transaction fees. However,…

Though I generally agree with the sentiment, there is one significant use case -- transferring money across country borders. Currently, transaction fees on cash transactions are much much higher than they are on cryptocurrencies (maybe except bitcoin) and so this would mean that, in theory, they could be used as a way to transfer goods across country borders.

Re: Web3 is centralized

#296

Post by 127 » Sun, Jan 02, 2022, 2:03 PM UTC

chx wrote: post #288

The problem with web3 is not that it's centralized -- that's irrelevant. The fundamental problem with all crypto"currencies" is as follows: the world uses real currencies and there is only one way this enters into the world of crypto"currencies": by someone selling a coin to someone else. Thus, regardless of what crypto"currency" we are talking about, it would be a zero sum game if not for transaction fees. However,…

>And once you entered the game, the only way for you to not lose money is to find a greater fool who will take over your crypto"currency", everyone who owns some becomes a proponent of it. It's an ingenious scam.

Yes, that's the current pension system.

Re: Web3 is centralized

#297

Post by 5560675260 » Sun, Jan 02, 2022, 2:04 PM UTC

chx wrote: post #288

The problem with web3 is not that it's centralized -- that's irrelevant. The fundamental problem with all crypto"currencies" is as follows: the world uses real currencies and there is only one way this enters into the world of crypto"currencies": by someone selling a coin to someone else. Thus, regardless of what crypto"currency" we are talking about, it would be a zero sum game if not for transaction fees. However,…

Can't you exchange goods and services for crypto, without using fiat? Transaction fees are obviously unfortunate, but there is just no going around the need for infrastructure. And where is an infrastructure - there are maintenance fees, crypto isn't unique in this regard.

Re: Web3 is centralized

#298

Post by CrazyStat » Sun, Jan 02, 2022, 2:04 PM UTC

cinquemb wrote: post #281

exo762 wrote: post #256

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Both of you are wrong. ZK fundamentally does not allow to hide the rules (the code). It only allows to hide particular executions. So yes, while you can have an ERC20 interface and some censorious garbage inside (I look at you, USDC), you can't hide that fact from observers.

The issue is that there are people blindly interacting with malicious contracts, which is more of a social problem and not a technical one. There are people now who for example, don't approve random token addrs that they haven't decompiled or which had the source available… i know, shocking… Did you respond to the right chain of comments, none of us mentioned anything related to ZK solutions (chains line mina or roll…

"It's not safe to use web3 unless you're comfortable analyzing decompiled source code" is a super good sign for the future of the ecosystem.

Re: Web3 is centralized

#299

Post by 37 » Sun, Jan 02, 2022, 2:06 PM UTC

emerongi wrote: post #162

discardedrefuse wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not instant and the fees aren't always low. I was trying to transfer $10 USD in Bitcoin last May, when the BTC market was going insane, and it was impossible.

Additionally: can you make cryptocurrency transactions offline? In my opinion that is a crucial part of the "digital cash" idea. I don't know the technical details so it would be nice if someone more knowledgeable could answer. I'll even throw in a scenario that I've encountered: the card readers in a store aren't working, because there is a connection issue. Instead of using cash in my literal physical wallet, I'd l…

AFAIK, the blockchain is online, so I can't conceive of a way for an offline transaction. I suppose you could write down your wallet service and/or ID on a piece of paper, then when the store goes back online they trustfully transfer the digital money, but even then one of the parties must be online.

Re: Web3 is centralized

#300

Post by quantum_mcts » Sun, Jan 02, 2022, 2:09 PM UTC

notpachet wrote: post #282

quantum_mcts wrote: post #280

So the argument starts with a (rather bizarre) claim that blockchains are centralized because one have to use the protocol that the rest of the network is using. The argument goes on with an attempt to contrast blockchains with the "web as it exists" and claim that one can "speak whatever protocol you want" in it -- with a caveat that "one have to put significant work" to convince others to use it. It is quite ironic…

I agree that there's a little confusion in the article regarding the role of protocols in the decentralization equation. That said, I do think the larger point (global consensus protocols are just another form of centralization) is valid and worth discussing.

> I agree that there's a little confusion

No - that's not a "little confusion". It is almost total lack of knowledge of the subject at hand. So many concrete examples by the author are not valid. Changes and forks in blockchain protocols happen all the time. You can start your own local blockchain in your own private IP subnet or whatever. You can create your own private ledger on the global net in less than a minute [1].

[1]: https://vittominacori.github.io/erc20-generator/