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

Real Problems That Web3 Solves, Part 1

billprin.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 319 posts

Re: Real Problems That Web3 Solves, Part 1

#71

Post by superfrank »

jdlshore wrote: post #11

Several years ago, Mozilla/Firefox created "Persona," which was an open-source federated identity system that provided all the benefits described here. The idea was that it would eventually be built into browsers. I used it on a commercial site myself for many years. It failed to gain traction, and Mozilla eventually pulled the plug. Persona had many advantages over the Web3 vision described in this article. It was p…

> Despite these advantages, Persona failed. I don't see how a blockchain-based approach, with so many disadvantages compared to Persona, could possibly succeed outside of the blockchain enthusiast community. And, on a technical level, a federated approach seems innumerably simpler and less wasteful than a blockchain-based approach.

Sometimes it's all about being in the right place, at the right time, with the right amount of hype. Inferior technologies win out all the time.

That being said, if (major if) auth through web3 did take off, I wouldn't be surprised if over time it slowly creeped back toward a solution that doesn't use blockchain since a non-blockchain solution would probably be simpler, cheaper, and faster.

Re: Real Problems That Web3 Solves, Part 1

#72

Post by pkulak »

nathias wrote: post #39
jdlshore wrote: post #11

Several years ago, Mozilla/Firefox created "Persona," which was an open-source federated identity system that provided all the benefits described here. The idea was that it would eventually be built into browsers. I used it on a commercial site myself for many years. It failed to gain traction, and Mozilla eventually pulled the plug. Persona had many advantages over the Web3 vision described in this article. It was p…

federated systems are bad, they combine the negatives of centralized and decentralized systems it is no wonder that they fail repeatedly

They fail because they are in the best interest of users, not corporations.

Re: Real Problems That Web3 Solves, Part 1

#73

Post by pkulak »

mattlondon wrote: post #67

> We need some way of saying “who we are” on the internet in a consistent manner. That way we can communicate with others in a verified way and associate with digital data that we own. We also often need that data to be interoperable between different web properties. Do we really need this? Do we really want to permanently tie identity across websites like this? I find this initial "need"/justification/requirement qu…

Private keys are cheap to make. There's no reason you couldn't have a different one for every site. Of course, then it's on you to keep track of them, but it's already on you to keep track of the credentials you're using now. At least this way, the default of "use the same creds everywhere" is secure, if not more private.

Re: Real Problems That Web3 Solves, Part 1

#74

Post by iskander »

superfrank wrote: post #71
jdlshore wrote: post #11

Several years ago, Mozilla/Firefox created "Persona," which was an open-source federated identity system that provided all the benefits described here. The idea was that it would eventually be built into browsers. I used it on a commercial site myself for many years. It failed to gain traction, and Mozilla eventually pulled the plug. Persona had many advantages over the Web3 vision described in this article. It was p…

> Despite these advantages, Persona failed. I don't see how a blockchain-based approach, with so many disadvantages compared to Persona, could possibly succeed outside of the blockchain enthusiast community. And, on a technical level, a federated approach seems innumerably simpler and less wasteful than a blockchain-based approach. Sometimes it's all about being in the right place, at the right time, with the right a…

For all of its flaws, I find the web3 space fun...but I'm also hoping that some of the non-financialized use cases move to other kinds of distributed algorithms, like Hypercore (https://hypercore-protocol.org/).

Even if the technological ideal comes to fruition in a few years (sharded modular proof-of-stake consensus blockchains with zero-knowledge rollups and dedicated data availability layers), it will still eternally remain enmeshed with speculation and scamming. I think there's a narrow time and place for the speculative assets but wouldn't want that interwoven throughout the fabric of everything online.

Re: Real Problems That Web3 Solves, Part 1

#75

Post by DeepYogurt »

mattlondon wrote: post #67

> We need some way of saying “who we are” on the internet in a consistent manner. That way we can communicate with others in a verified way and associate with digital data that we own. We also often need that data to be interoperable between different web properties. Do we really need this? Do we really want to permanently tie identity across websites like this? I find this initial "need"/justification/requirement qu…

I agree that we don't need unique identities across everything, but even if that is a real problem it is also solved by public key cryptography without a requirement of a blockchain.

Re: Real Problems That Web3 Solves, Part 1

#76

Post by betwixthewires »

mattlondon wrote: post #67

> We need some way of saying “who we are” on the internet in a consistent manner. That way we can communicate with others in a verified way and associate with digital data that we own. We also often need that data to be interoperable between different web properties. Do we really need this? Do we really want to permanently tie identity across websites like this? I find this initial "need"/justification/requirement qu…

So the thing about this is that there is no need to permanently tie identity across all sites and services you used (and provide), rather, the ability to do so when and where you need to do it.

There's nothing requiring a user to use the same identity across every service they interact with, but the option should be there. I wouldn't want my matrix username(s) and my fediverse account(s) tied to my HN username(s), but I might want a github/gitlab/codeberg account tied to a social/messaging account while having different "personas" for different applications. Overall it's a useful tool to have in your belt, so long as it doesn't limit you in other ways.

Re: Real Problems That Web3 Solves, Part 1

#77

Post by djohnston »

DeepYogurt wrote: post #75
mattlondon wrote: post #67

> We need some way of saying “who we are” on the internet in a consistent manner. That way we can communicate with others in a verified way and associate with digital data that we own. We also often need that data to be interoperable between different web properties. Do we really need this? Do we really want to permanently tie identity across websites like this? I find this initial "need"/justification/requirement qu…

I agree that we don't need unique identities across everything, but even if that is a real problem it is also solved by public key cryptography without a requirement of a blockchain.

Sure but the blockchain env like Ethereum gives you that for free along with a few slick chrome extensions like Metamask and a JS library (web3.js) that make all of this super easy to build on.

You don't need to make any transactions or whatever, but you're inheriting all these tools for free.

Re: Real Problems That Web3 Solves, Part 1

#78

Post by spinny »

vanusa wrote: post #59
spinny wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You are missing the point. The article is about login methods. Username/password vs message signed with a private key. The blockchain part is there because is the only ready-to-use way to do it in an browser. It's absurd how HN users in general are so dismissive of anything cryptocurrency

My point was usability. And being (effectively) forced to join / legitimize their hive to get anything done. It's absurd how HN users in general are so dismissive of anything cryptocurrency. It's quite reasonable actually, given the prevalence of not just hype, but frequently delusional / just plain rambling and incoherent hype surrounding it -- not to mention blatant fraud and manipulation aimed specifically at unso…

> My point was usability. And being (effectively) forced to join / legitimize their hive to get anything done

I agree with you on this. For the purpose of login in with a private key, i would prefer some browser extension (or built in the browser) that generates a key from a seed (like a crypto wallet) and only does that. This doesn't exist at this point.

> ... not to mention blatant fraud and manipulation aimed specifically and unsophisticated users

Also agree, but probably for different reasons. Many people on twitter have the tendency to be mean, twitter doesn't make people mean, but it amplifies it. There is so many scams and manipulation because scammers and con artists always existed and people's greed for that 100x token and so does the scamming

The speed of communication that the internet gave us also serves as an amplifier of the ugliness of human nature

Re: Real Problems That Web3 Solves, Part 1

#79

Post by iskander »

rbanffy wrote: post #54

I was fully expecting to see an empty HTML page. Correct me if I'm wrong, but the only new idea here is to use a ledger to hold public keys associated with an identity. You could add keys by signing a new key with one of the previously globally accepted ones proving you are that entity and the same would go for removing a lost one, by signing a new message with all the remaining keys. Having a key copied without your…

A lot of these "this is not very different from X, you could do Y" replies remind me of the original Dropbox news.yc thread.

What everyone seems to be missing is that the web3 apps and UI conventions already have broad adoption among millions of only mildly techy users. They don't know what SSH is but they do know how to sign things with their in-browser wallet app. Of course, they also seem to not always know that giving away your private keys is quite bad...

But any "solution" that requires e.g. using the terminal is not really competing in the same space.

Re: Real Problems That Web3 Solves, Part 1

#80

Post by iskander »

meheleventyone wrote: post #27
thesuperbigfrog wrote: post #20

Why can't this be done with existing public key cryptography?

There’s even a standard for doing this with WebAuthn.

...which has effectively neither adoption not momentum to achieve adoption: https://sec.okta.com/articles/2020/04/webauthn-great-and-it-...

For better or worse, there are a large (and ever growing) number of Metamask users these days...

Post reply on HN