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

171–180 of 319 posts

Re: Real Problems That Web3 Solves, Part 1

#171

Post by MBCook »

iskander wrote: post #131
rbanffy wrote: post #97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> But any "solution" that requires e.g. using the terminal is not really competing in the same space. The UI required for that is something that can be done in a couple minutes. The heavy lifting is done by libraries provided with the OS.

And Dropbox was trivially just rsync... Yet, crypto wallets remain the only cryptographic signature UI that normal people interact with.

Dropbox was “just rsync“ but WAY easier to use for normal people. The iPod was JUST a normal MP3 player with a very easy interface everyone could understand.

Ease of use is EVERYTHING.

At no point does anything described about how web3 works or solves problems sound easier to use than the current system. Logging in with email and a password is easy. Using a Google to sign in is even easier. Apple’s sign in system is ridiculously simple and frictionless.

“Start by finding a chain you like and creating a wallet” is not easy. Do you have to buy coins on the chain? I’ve been seeing a lot of these web3 articles and I truly don’t know. Buying coins is another huge hassle.

“Oh but they’ll already have a wallet.” How? At some point they have to create them. Even if it was easier once they’ve created it (which I dispute), how is that supposed to happen?

If you have an iPhone, you have an Apple account, can do sign in with Apple trivially. If you have an android phone, you have a Google account, you can do sign in with Google trivially. Either way you have an email address, that’s quite easy.

How can you EVER make something simpler than those? I think best case scenario you would be able to match them.

But then you’re back to the problem of why I should switch to the new thing when the current thing works just as well.

I just have a very hard time seeing normal users ever buy into any of this.

Re: Real Problems That Web3 Solves, Part 1

#172

Post by ziml77 »

mattlondon wrote: post #123
wan23 wrote: post #117

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Email addresses aren't really good for this. It's really easy to sign up for a service with someone else's email address, for example. Sure, if that person ever finds out they can potentially claim ownership of the account through a password reset, but it doesn't erase the fact that you have been using their "identity" for some time.

Is this still a thing though? Pretty much everything I've used in the past 10-15 years has required email validation before allowing you to do anything meaningful. Either way though, I don't see how an account claiming to be "wan23" would be any more trustworthy to me as created off of the back of an email account or off of a wallet ID - I still have no idea (nor do I care) who you are.

It is still a thing. Hell, even AWS let someone create an account with my email address without validation. Stupid system kept spamming me to alert me that the instance of whatever they spun up was stopped because there was no money in the account.

Re: Real Problems That Web3 Solves, Part 1

#173

Post by MBCook »

spinny wrote: post #46
dathinab wrote: post #8

Most web2 apps supports a smaller number of SSO providers. Technically "independent" SSO providers and similar existed, but non made it mainstream because there was no reason for App's to support them, but there was cost to support them. There is even less reason IMHO for most App's to support Web3 login (more complexity). Furthermore even if they do the web3 login would probably still list Google etc. as the web2 lo…

> It's questionable that more than one maybe two blockchains will be supported You don't really need a blockchain unless you need to keep data on a blockchain. To login and identify a user you can simply sign a message. I consider the address as the user "identity". Any blockchain data related to that address is mean to be public (some people register .eth on the ENS for example)

If you don’t need a blockchain what makes this web3? I thought that was supposed to be the defining feature.

If it’s just cryptographically signing things we’ve had that ability since PGP came out.

Re: Real Problems That Web3 Solves, Part 1

#174

Post by rchaud »

thebean11 wrote: post #96
endisneigh wrote: post #95

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What you’re saying is also true with web3. A bad actor’s key could be banned and a list of bad actors could be shared among sites resulting in the same thing. In fact, if you believe in privacy at all you’d want to reject this idea for that alone.

Sure, multiple independent sites could individually ban you. That's a fundamentally different problem, and much much less likely. An antidote to that would be using a different key on each site you authenticate to. You still only need to store a single key, all other keys are derived from that yet cannot be associated with their sibling keys. > What you’re saying is also trust with web3. Not quite sure what you mean…

> Sure, multiple independent sites could individually ban you. That's a fundamentally different problem, and much much less likely.

Wouldn't there be a common, shared list of malicious wallets that can be automatically blocked?

Ublock Origin doesn't update its ad domains list itself, it relies on a number of lists that other people have created. I've never had to lift a finger ever since I installed UBO.

Re: Real Problems That Web3 Solves, Part 1

#175

Post by bko »

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…

> 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.

I don't think you necessarily need blockchain. Can't you just prove that you are who you say by signing something and sending it to the service? You can just use the protocol.

Re: Real Problems That Web3 Solves, Part 1

#176

Post by enos_feedler »

serverholic wrote: post #170
enos_feedler wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This doesn't explain why Persona didn't work. Unless we understand why it didn't work and show how web3 alleviates the problem, how is anyone to believe a web3 login system will work? You could also ask what has changed since Persona tried and failed? In other words, why now?

Web3 login has been working for awhile. I've used uniswap for example and it's a fantastic experience.

What percentage of all web logins are using web3 vs web2? When we say "work" here, we mean taking market share.

Re: Real Problems That Web3 Solves, Part 1

#177

Post by MBCook »

spinny wrote: post #57
thesuperbigfrog wrote: post #20

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

It can. It just happens that the easiest way to achieve this is using web3, even if there is no blockchains involved. The article is about login methods, not cryptos or web3

> The article is about login methods, not […] web3

It’s literally titled “ Real Problems That Web3 Solves, Part 1”

Re: Real Problems That Web3 Solves, Part 1

#178

Post by betwixthewires »

mattlondon wrote: post #89
betwixthewires wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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), bu…

So if you are not going to go whole-hog and have one true identity for everything, why bother using anything apart from an email address? The argument seems to be that consistency allows you to prove ownership and re-use all of your content etc across the web by tying everything back to one verified identity. If you are having different identities on different sites then that benefit disappears, and I fail to see how…

Well I thought I explained it effectively, but there are numerous scenarios where you'd want to use the same identity across multiple services, cross sharing of data, provable rights, etc. But that doesn't mean you're limited to one, or that you want to use it for every service you use. The benefit doesn't disappear, the benefit only applies when you want it. It isn't all or nothing.

Re: Real Problems That Web3 Solves, Part 1

#179

Post by MBCook »

avereveard wrote: post #101

So, web3 regularly gets updated into the front page, only to be utterly trashed in the comments session. What gives?

There is a group of users here on HN that REALLY like cryptocurrency‘s and blockchains and such. Web3 seems to be the latest on that hype-train.

There is a different group here on HM that REALLY hates it all. It was interesting technologically but then it started producing more CO2 and using more energy than reasonably sized countries. It also seems to be the method du jour for scammers to take money from people. It’s almost single handedly enabled the ransomware industry.

And people like to shit on the current hot thing, deservedly or not.

So here we are.

Re: Real Problems That Web3 Solves, Part 1

#180

Post by wmf »

ilogik wrote: post #137
mattlondon wrote: post #125

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> uncensorability I suspect that this will be a major issue in the long-run. Once these sort of crypto-based logins become synonymous with CP and terrorism, they're going to be shunned by the average person on the street. Yes yes yes, people use email and whatsapp for the same, but at least there is the option for Google and Facebook to censor or block/ban those users (and it feels like there is increasing legal/legi…

if I run an online service, and you login with web3, if you're an asshole, I can still ban your "indelible" account

Web3 services will be run by assholes for assholes so they won't need to ban anyone.
Post reply on HN