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

Web3 is centralized

blog.wesleyac.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

391–400 of 497 posts

Re: Web3 is centralized

#391

Post by acdha »

fullstackchris wrote: post #362
acdha wrote: post #342

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> And the problem is centralization, which facilitates censorship and totalitarian control. This is a gross misunderstanding of both the current banking system (which is decentralized) and the degree to which using a slow database doesn’t prevent legal actions. Blockchains are very easy to monitor and censor: ideal for an authoritarian government to get a signed confession for every disapproved transaction you make,…

I think that's a bit disingenuine considering the US government couldn't even put up a healthcare signup website without it crashing. With such a track record, you really think they could just "tap in" or "modify" any given crypto protocol so they could audit every transaction? Give me a break.

> I think that's a bit disingenuine considering the US government couldn't even put up a healthcare signup website without it crashing.

Speaking of disingenuous, I feel compelled to note that the failure was built by the private sector (CGI Federal) and fixed by the government (Mikey Dickinson’s USDS team), and it’s certainly not like there aren’t plenty of failures in private industry. You can’t honestly say anything about an entire sector based on a single cherry-picked example. For example, should we look at the high level of skill shown by Stuxnet and similar government operations, compare it to Experian, and conclude that the private sector can’t operate computers securely?

> With such a track record, you really think they could just "tap in" or "modify" any given crypto protocol so they could audit every transaction?

A public transaction ledger means you’re giving them that with no work and there are blockchain analytics companies which already have government contracts even if you believe that civil servants can’t use computers.

Similarly, there’s a well documented history of governments monitoring network traffics, collecting forensics data from phones in police custody, installing malware on people’s phones or computers, etc. There’s a zero-percent chance that they would forget to check for cryptocurrency activity along with everything else.

Re: Web3 is centralized

#392

Post by davidmurdoch »

udbhavs wrote: post #371
shrimpx wrote: post #271

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The problem with "web3" is it implies/its proponents claim that it's a successor to web 2.0. How does it make sense for this crypto "assettech" stuff to replace/supersede the current www stack? Naming it "web3" just comes off as a cheap attention grab.

From what I've read web3 creates a new stack in the sense that ENS is used instead of traditional domain names, public key cryptography replaces traditional auth, smart contracts replace application backends and the blockchain acts as the database storing assets, user generated content and profiles (with large or volatile data stored on IPFS).

I find it so strange that connecting the dots you described here is so hard for so many people.

Re: Web3 is centralized

#393

Post by Yizahi »

lukeramsden wrote: post #218
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.

Then you can use Bitcoin Lightning, a micropayments network layered on top of Bitcoin, and settled on-chain. There are solutions to these things, it's still just an early market.

Oh yeah, that technological marvel/crutch when every single participant must lock permanently a big sums of tokens in advance to each other, and then the system will solve that little easy CS problem called "traveling salesman" in realtime on millions of paths and clients simultaneously. That one? Amazing and really enticing proposal but I'll stick with predatory mastecard for now, tyvm.

Re: Web3 is centralized

#394

Post by kortex »

gumby wrote: post #272

> but global consensus is a goal that is fundamentally at odds with the goal of decentralization. I’ve long fantasized that machines should “evolve” the network protocols they use to communicate. Parts of packet protocols they never use to communicate might gradually be dropped while common higher level portions always needing to be used might migrate lower. Of course more “formal” protocol specification would still…

That is certainly a cool idea, but how would a system like that cope with getting "wires crossed"? The nice thing about standard protocols (a form of consensus) is that there is a schema and at least at the transport level, there are no unambiguous values.

Without consensus, you have the risk of party A saying something, and party B interprets it in a different way than intent.

Re: Web3 is centralized

#395

Post by andrecarini »

zinekeller wrote: post #374
chx wrote: post #357

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> You are talking about just one function - transfer of value I do not. I am talking of the only way money enters this system. If there would be no money in the system no one would care. At the end of the day, in this time and place, our society decided money is the ultimate goal. I don't like it but it's what it is. > You can have much lower transaction fees than in Visa / Mastercard First of all: it's nonsensical t…

> Second, it's not inherent to the money system to use Visa / Mastercard. You can use other ways to transfer money -- but again, this is irrelevant. To highlight this, Americans are grappling with Zelle (which is just rolled out) and ACH while their neighbors to the north have Interac running relatively seamlessly and Europeans have SEPA and even some countries have local feeless/reasonably priced quick transfer syst…

> and even some countries have local feeless/reasonably priced quick transfer systems

Brazil has one [0]: instant transfers to any account, 24/7, zero fees (at least for now). You can buy pizza, taxi rides and pay your rent with it.

[0]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pix_(electronic_payment_system...

Re: Web3 is centralized

#396

Post by acdha »

davidmurdoch wrote: post #392
udbhavs wrote: post #371

Earlier quoted context omitted.

From what I've read web3 creates a new stack in the sense that ENS is used instead of traditional domain names, public key cryptography replaces traditional auth, smart contracts replace application backends and the blockchain acts as the database storing assets, user generated content and profiles (with large or volatile data stored on IPFS).

I find it so strange that connecting the dots you described here is so hard for so many people.

It’s more that technical people understand how this actually works and realize that, for example, all of these “web3” apps depend heavily on the real web and underlying internet protocols like TLS, IPFS is expensive and slow enough that it’s not suitable for most applications, and the proposed solution for the backend is both unusable for apps requiring privacy or access control and, even if it did work, much slower and far more expensive than hosting your app on a single iPhone.

When you want to be paid up front for something which needs fundamental redesigns and many orders of magnitude improvements for scalability and performance, it’s reasonable to question your motives.

Re: Web3 is centralized

#397

Post by kortex »

exo762 wrote: post #234

Very curious. I'll go point by point. > while anyone can join the Ethereum or Bitcoin network, you can only join if you agree to follow the same protocol that all the other nodes use. Just reiterated definition of the protocol. Absolutely irrelevant to decentralization topic. > The way this protocol is decided on is not exactly centralized, but it's not exactly decentralized either. Decentralization is not "I do what…

Yeah the whole point about "everyone agrees on a protocol therefore it is centralized" is one hell of a strawman. Centralized means "some small number of entities can unilaterally decide to change the rules". Anyone can change the rules at any time and users can decide to follow or not. This is just a hard fork.

Re: Web3 is centralized

#398

Post by it_does_follow »

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 no, nothing in the real world is like this

Retail FOREX is pretty similar. It's a zero sum game with broker's fees, plus you're playing the game with a lot of very experienced, very well funded institutional investors.

I think crypto has basically eaten any interest in retail FOREX, but a few years back it was gaining some traction and I was amazed at how many people were playing a (typically highly leveraged) game that was clearly not in their advantage.

Re: Web3 is centralized

#399

Post by theK »

xchaotic wrote: post #211
theK wrote: post #90

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not completely. The main difference between blockchain and classical banking is that the protocol defines what transaction can be done and the network of block producing nodes manages the evolution of its state. In classical banking you have multiple routes that go around the protocol (law in this case) and you also live in a federated feudal system where your bank reigns supreme in what you own.

I call bs on this argument. Protocol on the blockchain still has to abide by the rule of law. And the idea that certain things are not allowed on the blockchain is false - someone will create a new fork, chain or there will be a more elaborate workaround. It’s just a very complicated way to deliver anything.

Adoption of forks depends on public adoption. Let's call this common consensus. Classical law is just the public deciding which set of rules leads to a healthy society, these laws are then adpptedby societal structures. Let's call this... Hmm common consensus? You are seeing differences where there aren't any.

Re: Web3 is centralized

#400

Post by theK »

vmception wrote: post #100
theK wrote: post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Tracking partial identity through tokens is actually a very common concept amongst the newer blockchain platforms which also have addressed such topics as the drawback you describe. While said attack is theoretically possible it only is applicable to tokens managed by the same contract and only on platforms which do manifest tokens as script state (think erc20). Platforms with native assets (Cardano and some others)…

where can I learn more about that approach? I just assumed the eUTXO model would be more like the UTXO model where assets could still be tracked to a single address, like with the old Counterparty or OMNI model in Bitcoin. What would you consider Solana's approach to assets? I was surprised to find that each address has another unique address for its balance and possession of any asset issued on that network.

The key is not in eUTXO (allthough eUTXO is a great piece of work, especially because it solves a multitude of scaling issues in the long run), it is in the ledger's capability of handling custom assets natively. This way a wallet exactly shows you which tokens you own are affected by a contract invocation.

I don't know how solana handles assets but I personally stay clear from that ecosystem. Too much VC hype for my likes and way too little decentralization of funds.

Post reply on HN