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

My First Impressions of Web3

moxie.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

271–280 of 1001 posts

Re: My First Impressions of Web3

#271

Post by temp8964 »

wpietri wrote: post #172
PragmaticPulp wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's refreshing to read an article that admits this: > > Even nerds do not want to run their own servers at this point. I actually enjoy build and running servers, but only for hobby purposes. When it comes down to anything business related or critical, I have zero desire to run and maintain it on my own. And I especially don't want to have to handle security for large amounts of money that could disappear in an inst…

For sure. I ran my own servers for many years. And I still enjoy playing with hardware at home. But a couple years back I shut down my last colocated physical server and I do not miss it. The background stress of knowing that at any point I might have to wake up, haul my ass down to a colo, and swap a motherboard just got to me. Now all my must-stay-up stuff is built via Terraform in a a public cloud. If there's a ha…

Is hardware failure a common problem making you can't sleep? I don't get it. I run several desktops and servers at home for decades. Other than my baby pulled keys out of keyboards, I never had any hardware problem at all. And some of computers are more than ten years old.

Re: My First Impressions of Web3

#272

Post by murat124 »

exdsq wrote: post #92
murat124 wrote: post #21

I don't like that when an actually good successor to web2 comes along it won't be called web3 because of this bullshit that they call web3.

Quoted post unavailable.

Well the flaw being they claim it is decentralized when it really isn't. How can a blockchain based web be more decentralized than what I run on my vps? In any case, all the things I read about this cryptoweb technology screams bullshit (and scam/moneygrab - possibly by investors).

Re: My First Impressions of Web3

#273

Post by threeseed »

dylkil wrote: post #212
not2b wrote: post #188

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In my view it is only proof-of-work systems that must be rejected. Alternatives that are less harmful are possible. Pretty much everything that has a large carbon footprint is going to have to be fixed to reduce that footprint, including web3.

the public dismay at the carbon footprint of crypto is always fascinating to me. The network rewards are setup in such a way the the most profitable miners are the ones with the cheapest electricity as this is their biggest overhead. This pushes miners to the cheapest forms of electricity, i.e renewables

Renewables aren't the cheapest form of electricity.

It is when you get it (a) for free by stealing it or (b) from countries that have lax regulations.

And in both cases this is the dirtiest fossil fuels not renewables.

Re: My First Impressions of Web3

#274

Post by codehalo »

clarle wrote: post #25

As an engineer, I feel like this single post helped me better understand Web3 and how it worked under the hood better than any of the heavily hyped Discord and Twitter announcements of new projects over the past year. It's interesting how tightly coupled Metamask is to all of the other big crypto / NFT marketplaces. Feels like the "distributed web" portion of it has just been an over-exaggeration all along.

Seems like you (and a vast majority of HN including Moxie) is tying web3 to several centralized front ends (Metamask/OpenSea).

I saw this back in the 90's when a lot of people thought the internet was "Internet Explorer".

Re: My First Impressions of Web3

#275

Post by gremlinsinc »

baash05 wrote: post #231
gremlinsinc wrote: post #214

Earlier quoted context omitted.

FTP is horrible. I'm glad as a web dev I haven't touched it in 8 years not since I worked for a hosting company in tech support.... git, or even rsync over ssh is way better... The upcoming generation..even the 'non-tech' people are tech-savvy, meaning most could probably get arch linux up and running at least via a distro or follow the docs, etc...where there parents would fail. the problem is they need to create so…

Not a chance on that mate.. No way on Arch. Most of my neighbours can't change their wifi password. Heaps of the 20 somethings can't even run "ls" in a terminal.

come on, ls? that's easy. Anyone can do that... now try exiting VIM without a tutorial, or previous knowledge....

Re: My First Impressions of Web3

#276

Post by threeseed »

wmf wrote: post #241
threeseed wrote: post #140

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Problem is who cares if you run your own servers when everyone you know is viewing NFTs through servers which are manipulating the data like Opensea is.

In theory you should be able to build a new NFT marketplace and airdrop the shit out of it to replace OpenSea.

And in theory I can build a social network and become bigger than Facebook.

The reality however is that market dynamics, acquisition costs, network effects etc prevent this from happening. And these aren't things that crypto can really solve.

Re: My First Impressions of Web3

#277

Post by justinator »

wyck wrote: post #247
wizzwizz4 wrote: post #224

Earlier quoted context omitted.

By your definition, the original Ponzi scheme isn't a pyramid scheme. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ponzi_scheme That scheme was based on arbitrage of international reply coupons, of which there were a finite number in circulation.

Poorly worded on my part, I meant > as long as new investors contribute new funds, and as long as most of the investors do not demand full repayment and still believe in the non-existent assets they are purported to own. As mentioned this happens a lot with shitcoins and yield farmers, its rather easy to setup, but is not indicative of the industry, and the main source to blame for this misconception is the media, be…

It just sounds like Bitcoin to me. The proponents tell me how much it's worth and you're stupid to not want to invest. A few get rich and the rest are left poorer than what they started with. Moxie used the phrase, "gold rush" in this essay, and it's fitting for cryptocurrency itself as far as I can tell.

I'm poor, (but not stupid, thank you!), but I've only seen crypto being used as payment for prostitution. Which, hey if that works, good on 'em, I support the idea of safe, legal sex work.

Re: My First Impressions of Web3

#278

Post by majormajor »

wyck wrote: post #247
wizzwizz4 wrote: post #224

Earlier quoted context omitted.

By your definition, the original Ponzi scheme isn't a pyramid scheme. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ponzi_scheme That scheme was based on arbitrage of international reply coupons, of which there were a finite number in circulation.

Poorly worded on my part, I meant > as long as new investors contribute new funds, and as long as most of the investors do not demand full repayment and still believe in the non-existent assets they are purported to own. As mentioned this happens a lot with shitcoins and yield farmers, its rather easy to setup, but is not indicative of the industry, and the main source to blame for this misconception is the media, be…

> Poorly worded on my part, I meant > as long as new investors contribute new funds, and as long as most of the investors do not demand full repayment and still believe in the non-existent assets they are purported to own.

Isn't this just saying "something can't be a pyramid scheme unless it has already collapsed"?

Whereas the argument being made is that looking like a pyramid scheme is something that tells you something about the future likelihood of collapse.

(I think there's also an interesting dynamic that's not explored much here about "finite supply" - unless/until every coin except for one or a small handful collapse, it seems like "crypto" as a whole is subject to inflationary pressure from new coins. Would BTC be worth more in USD terms if ETH didn't exist?)

Re: My First Impressions of Web3

#279

Post by zucker42 »

wyck wrote: post #247
wizzwizz4 wrote: post #224

Earlier quoted context omitted.

By your definition, the original Ponzi scheme isn't a pyramid scheme. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ponzi_scheme That scheme was based on arbitrage of international reply coupons, of which there were a finite number in circulation.

Poorly worded on my part, I meant > as long as new investors contribute new funds, and as long as most of the investors do not demand full repayment and still believe in the non-existent assets they are purported to own. As mentioned this happens a lot with shitcoins and yield farmers, its rather easy to setup, but is not indicative of the industry, and the main source to blame for this misconception is the media, be…

Are you claiming that nothing is a pyramid scheme until it crashes?

Re: My First Impressions of Web3

#280

Post by threeseed »

jfb wrote: post #84

Could it be that people aren't really interested in undoing the mistakes of Web2, but rather just kicking off a new round of consolidation, where they could be the gatekeepers/platform owners?

It's more that developers are bored and looking for something new and shiny.

And VCs are flush with cash and have nowhere to deploy it.

Post reply on HN