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

Welcome to Web 3.0

welcome2web3.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

191–200 of 309 posts

Re: Welcome to Web 3.0

#191

Post by UncleMeat »

can16358p wrote: post #100
JamesMcMinn wrote: post #95

So far I've yet to see a convincing argument for what "Web 3" is and can offer that we can't currently do without the use of a Blockchain. It all seems to boil down to "it'll cost something to do something", which isn't exactly a convincing argument on its own. The responses to this story read rather like Facebook comments on controversial news articles - there's a bunch of comments claiming the website is a bunch of…

Sure. A "free" internet. Not in terms of money, but in terms of freedom of speech without censorship and a controlling authority. With no authority that decides whether I can send money to/receive from someone. Especially living in a corrupt authoratarian system, even only those two outweight all the bad sides (tx fees, scalability, PoW environmental effects) for me. It does more good than it harms in the big picture…

Elsewhere in this thread somebody is claiming that a Ticketmaster system could defeat scalpers by preventing resales to anybody who didn’t buy a band’s album. That sounds like an authority that decides whether I can send money to someone.

Re: Welcome to Web 3.0

#192

Post by Jcowell »

Karrot_Kream wrote: post #155
lpcvoid wrote: post #109

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why the hell do I need to "own" something online? Whatever I publish, people can do whatever the hell they want with it. I don't want DRM incorporated into the internet. Blockchain is a scam and anybody parroting its supposed advantages is either invested or naive.

I mean, if you don't want to "own" something online, then don't? Nobody is telling you what to or not to do. Don't get angry at another person's preferences. I think a much more cogent criticism is that it's very difficult for Web3/on-chain ownership to correspond to any form of meaningful ownership for the user. "Yeah I own digital , so what?" I only really see a use when mapping to an actually digitally scare good,…

One thing I don’t understand is how does this migrate away from things such as copyright licenses ? Even if you “buy” a digital good What stops a license from being applied to it?

Re: Welcome to Web 3.0

#193

Post by 3np »

JamesMcMinn wrote: post #95

So far I've yet to see a convincing argument for what "Web 3" is and can offer that we can't currently do without the use of a Blockchain. It all seems to boil down to "it'll cost something to do something", which isn't exactly a convincing argument on its own. The responses to this story read rather like Facebook comments on controversial news articles - there's a bunch of comments claiming the website is a bunch of…

With the risk of spamming this, but since the confusion keeps being repeated in this thread: This submission is a presentation that captures the intention quite well, with a linked post by the person who brought the term to the blockchain community: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30683038

Both predate the recent hype-wave.

Re: Welcome to Web 3.0

#194

Post by detaro »

rvz wrote: post #179
detaro wrote: post #143

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So purely paying with cryptocurrency is now somehow "web"?

So one can't write a web 3 app using this technology between wallets names (something like ENS for identity and domains [0][1]) and use that as a platform to accept cryptocurrencies to official and verified accounts in a decentralized manner, with all of the advantages and use cases above? So that is not even utility then? [0] https://ens.domains/ [1] https://skiff.org/updates/skiff-ens

Maybe one can, but that wasn't your answer, was it?

Re: Welcome to Web 3.0

#195

Post by slightwinder »

MaxKK wrote: post #98
JamesMcMinn wrote: post #95

So far I've yet to see a convincing argument for what "Web 3" is and can offer that we can't currently do without the use of a Blockchain. It all seems to boil down to "it'll cost something to do something", which isn't exactly a convincing argument on its own. The responses to this story read rather like Facebook comments on controversial news articles - there's a bunch of comments claiming the website is a bunch of…

Crypto makes it possible to own something digitally. Web3 incorporates this ownership. While Web 2.0 was about writing something to the internet and the World Wide Web was about reading something on the internet. It's a further iteration which just makes sense.

Everything you own with crypto, is some data inside this crypto's world. Without any connection to other worlds, those data have no value in itself. And the moment you connect it, laws come into play and your crypto is just a tool to manage this ownership. But for this, crypto has no real benefit so far. And it's questionable whether it ever will have. We get the same practical benefits without all the expensive crypto-bells&whistles.

Re: Welcome to Web 3.0

#196

Post by detaro »

3np wrote: post #189
detaro wrote: post #132

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's been kind of two waves of "This is web3". The first was primarily about protocols like IPFS, dat/hyper, ... (2018/19?) and then at some point it got used more and more by blockchain folks, and they kind of dominate the conversation now. What it "actually" is is up in the air and not really defined. (But the blockchain scenario still often involves things like IPFS as underlying components)

b̵l̵o̵c̵k̵c̵h̵a̵i̵n̵ ̵f̵o̵l̵k̵s̵ NFT-hype snake-oil kids who seem to believe that cloud platforms === exposing something online. Most blockchain folks I know also despise it. And, I'd even say it's three waves, the first being TBL semantic web, which predates bitcoin.

True, but the semantic web == web 3.0 angle has been dead for a long time, i.e. I haven't heard proponents of semantic web use "web 3.0" in a long time.

Re: Welcome to Web 3.0

#197

Post by Jcowell »

qbasic_forever wrote: post #59
antoinec wrote: post #36

Maybe blockchains immutability is going to actually make people think twice before putting something online. "Web2" makes us think that we can delete whatever we post, or what we send is not going to be stored. And we believe it because it is technically possible, even though we don't have any way to double check. If a service claims that you can delete/hide whatever data you uploaded on the blockchain, you'd be able…

It's all fun and games until a judge orders you to remove the content, like a revenge porn photo for example. You'll have plenty of time to think about how best to explain immutability, blockchains, etc. as you're sitting in jail in contempt of court. The web3 dream of nothing is ever deleted is going to have to hit the brick wall of reality that we as a society agree to follow laws that explicitly allow deleting and…

This makes me think, how would this work with the “right to be forgotten” laws ?

Re: Welcome to Web 3.0

#198

Post by piva00 »

IanCal wrote: post #159
JamesMcMinn wrote: post #95

So far I've yet to see a convincing argument for what "Web 3" is and can offer that we can't currently do without the use of a Blockchain. It all seems to boil down to "it'll cost something to do something", which isn't exactly a convincing argument on its own. The responses to this story read rather like Facebook comments on controversial news articles - there's a bunch of comments claiming the website is a bunch of…

> can offer that we can't currently do without the use of a Blockchain. The real issue with responses like this is that you can do anything with computers anyway. The blockchain basically gives you a * Globally writable database * With stored procedures * And row level security Now, you can always swap out that with a centralised service. Turing machines can do stuff and machines can talk to each other. Whether it's…

> So to make, say, an in game item that people can re-sell, swap, etc, instead of

> * Make a website

> * Setup the DB

> * Manage user accounts

> * Manage payment information

> * Code the sales, auctions, etc

> * Build the integration with my game & my API

> * Manage and maintain the server

> to do it the traditional way. To do it on chain I

> * Create a trivial NFT contract

> * Build the integration with my game & a generic API

I don't understand this argument.

You describe step-by-step in a detailed way what would be needed to implement the usual way and then simply glosses over "build the integration with my game & a generic API". That is exactly the tricky part, isn't it?

The integration to your game also depends on your game having some kind of linking between the NFT and your in-game item (hence a database). It depends on the communication with this generic API being reliable enough so you can completely offload your load to that, if it's not reliable for that you'll need to create intermediate API layers to deal with these issues, and so on and so forth. Generic APIs are never really generic.

And this is the most beaten example already, what else can this provide apart from giving me ownership of in-game items?

Trivialising the work of "build the integration with my game" as something that "just happens" is a naive way to shove the hard work unto a trivial step.

Re: Welcome to Web 3.0

#199

Post by piva00 »

PretzelPirate wrote: post #183
goosedragons wrote: post #113

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You could own something digitally before crypto. I've got some pretty sweet digital 7th Edition Magic cards I've had for about 2 decades. I traded away some of them and sold others.

If those are on Magic the Gathering Online, do you really own them? What happens when that shuts down in favor of Magic Arena?

If the game that is using the NFTs I bought is shutdown, what the hell is the value of these in-game items that I bought if the game for them doesn't exist anymore?

Yeah, someone else can create a new game and say "we accept the NFT items from Defunct Game X", you are still completely under the control of whomever is providing you the platform for these in-game items to actually exist. If that platform is taken away you just have some bits of data pointing to other bits of data with no meaning and no value at all...

Re: Welcome to Web 3.0

#200

Post by lapinot »

Double_a_92 wrote: post #124
kgraves wrote: post #102

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Isn't IPFS (InterPlanetary File System) considered web3? can't you use IFPS without cryptocurrencies? [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/InterPlanetary_File_System

IPFS is basically torrenting, and doesn't even use a Blockchain. And of top of that people are not even using it properly, because centralized nodes seem to be the main wait to get access to the files.

> And of top of that people are not even using it properly, because centralized nodes seem to be the main wait to get access to the files.

That's because last i checked (admittedly a couple years ago) their software was slow and ressource intensive. Which is quite the opposite of what you want for real-life network transfer software. Meanwhile stuff like syncthing seem to get bittorrent-like transfer just fine.

Dat/hypercore seamed less bloaty (again a while ago), i wonder what the solid projects in this area are currently.. (torrent-based network filesystems)

Post reply on HN