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

Web3 is centralized and inefficient

neelc.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

161–170 of 769 posts

Re: Web3 is centralized and inefficient

#161

Post by makeitdouble »

alexb_ wrote: post #97

People use centralized systems because they actually like the convenience that comes with it. And with that, comes the decentralized system changing in such a way that it changes to almost NEEDING centralization. The problem is that engineers and cybersecurity people all think that everyone else thinks like they do, when in actuality the complete opposite is true. The biggest example is the internet itself - the inte…

People are fine with centralized systems that make sense and brings value.

To me the best part of decentralized systems is that they allow for centralized sub-systems to emerge organically, instead of being decided top-down.

For instance, I don't think that when launching the first internet nodes we would have anticipated that certs should have centralized entities, it happened that it made more sense that way once we saw the issues emerging from actual use.

Re: Web3 is centralized and inefficient

#162

Post by eek2121 »

alexb_ wrote: post #97

People use centralized systems because they actually like the convenience that comes with it. And with that, comes the decentralized system changing in such a way that it changes to almost NEEDING centralization. The problem is that engineers and cybersecurity people all think that everyone else thinks like they do, when in actuality the complete opposite is true. The biggest example is the internet itself - the inte…

Centralization is a cost cutting measure, nothing more. Don't be fooled.

Re: Web3 is centralized and inefficient

#163

Post by yashg »

bigbonch wrote: post #61
yashg wrote: post #31

Agree 100%. Web3 is useless. The whole web3 thing is an extension to get more people and more real money to get into the crypto ecosystem and provide liquidity to the early adopters and insiders. I haven't found one legitimate use case for blockchain. The only thing it is useful for it speculative gambling. I wrote about it some time ago and and shared here on HN https://yash.info/blog/what-is-web3/

Walmart Canada has used blockchain [1] to better their supply chains systems. I suspect when you say you "haven't found one legitimate use case for blockchain" you're referring to the consumer space based on current offerings. I would argue that "blockchain" just as an idea and technology has plenty of use cases. [1] https://hbr.org/2022/01/how-walmart-canada-uses-blockchain-t...

The article is co-authored by two co-founders of a supply chain management solution company called DLT Labs that uses blockchain somewhere. I checked out their solution on their website.

The product looks like any other web app. Is it really using a blockchain somewhere at the backend to store something? May be. It is certainly using some standard RDBMS to store the structured data. There's no way you can store all of that you see in the screenshots on a blockchain.

So what it is that is actually being stored on a blockchain? Not clear.

Is it possible that they use the word blockchain to get free PR? May be. I don't want to judge.

The product page doesn't have the word blockchain anywhere. https://www.dltlabs.com/platforms/asset-track

DL Freight, the product used by Walmart Canada also doesn't mention the word blockchain anywhere. There is just one mention of a shared ledger. https://www.dltlabs.com/platforms/asset-track/dl-freight

Did find blockchain on this page https://www.dltlabs.com/platforms/ecosystem

But immediately you see this

"And because its built using distributed ledger technology, every transaction is 100% auditable, immutable, and visible only to permissioned users – helping to create a genuine layer of trust between the parties that transact on the platform." It refers to permissioned users, so it's not a blockchain. Which is supposed to be permissionless. They aren't even claiming. They are calling it a distributed ledger.

In fact I have noticed this even with R3 Corda. The enterprise blockchain provider. They use the term distributed ledger to describe their offering, not blockchain. But all the marketing material and PR pieces always tout blockchain in the headline.

If something is permissioned, trustful and centralised, is it even a blockchain?

Re: Web3 is centralized and inefficient

#164

Post by jeroenhd »

achow wrote: post #35
Victerius wrote: post #2

Can someone explain what Web3 is in 50 words or less to a layman?

Web1 was read only (ex. blog) Web2 is Read+Write (all interactive apps - email travel booking, stock trading etc. However, the content of these are owned by mega or small corp) Web3 is Read+Write &'Own' your data. By virtue of blockchain tech you can take your data/content and use some other service. You have your NFTs, you have your Bitcoins, you can use any service to manage those.

Forums were read/write applications that should be part of "web 2.0", and they existed in the early 2000s. Then Gmail came along, which was the first "web 2.0" application, and eventually HTML5 came around the corner, which truly meant "web 2.0" was now ubiquitous. The mega corps took over the internet but in my experience that didn't happen until there were at least three popular "web2" definitions.

These terms are meaningless and arbitrary. I've never heard of popularized "read only" websites, even in the late 90s websites had things like guest books where you could leave a comment.

I'm also not sure about the legal ownership one might derive from the blockchain. Going by legal standards, I don't think you own anything unless you sign a sales agreement that says the cryptocurrency exchange means something related to ownership.

Re: Web3 is centralized and inefficient

#165

Post by everfree »

vxNsr wrote: post #154
everfree wrote: post #121

Earlier quoted context omitted.

An immutable database guarantees that the "paper trail" has not been tampered with. In supply chains, there's a lot to be said for having a paper trail even if (or especially if) some of the papers are fraudulently written.

If I own every single node it doesn’t guarantee that.

If you are the sole person keeping records for a large company in your personal desk drawer, it also doesn't guarantee that.

But nobody designs a process like that.

Re: Web3 is centralized and inefficient

#166

Post by landemva »

TheCowboy wrote: post #43
vmception wrote: post #5

> A lot of Web3 platforms are in fact centralized. Your wallet (MetaMask), marketplaces (OpenSea), APIs (Alchemy) are all central platforms. Sure, they use a distributed database (blockchain), but before that it’s still a Go app on AWS, meaning its centralized. > Your wallet (MetaMask) Run your own node. This is lazy reporting to reach the end point about fawning over FreeBSD (its in the article, literally an article…

> Run your own node. This is lazy reporting It isn't practical for the majority of people to run their own node. Even Vitalik Buterin acknowledges[1] this isn't realistic for the current state of things. Last year I was interested in running a sidechain node and I was shocked when I looked at minimum system requirements. I can't just run it in the background and I have a 5600X Ryzen. Plus my NVMe drive needed to be m…

' My interest for running a node was ... to attempt to counter frontrunning aka sandwich attacks. '

You may have misunderstood the eth tech stack. Running your own node is not a means to prevent sandwich attacks.

Re: Web3 is centralized and inefficient

#167

Post by mccorrinall »

TobyTheDog123 wrote: post #65
mccorrinall wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If we “missed the boat” for Web3, does that imply that it isn’t going to bring its benefits to all of us?

I was speaking from an investment perspective there, not a utility one.

Is it overvalued at this point? Will reach its end of growth soon and stay niche?

You can’t be truly bullish about something and tell me at the same time that I missed the boat.

Re: Web3 is centralized and inefficient

#168

Post by yashg »

moorow wrote: post #117
philliphaydon wrote: post #99

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Blockchain does not help supply chains. It doesn’t guarantee that things have been tampered with. It doesn’t solve any problems.

I remember a project when I was consulting that was floated, a few years ago. It was a blockchain-backed ledger for tracking fuel charges across a truck fleet - effectively, when the truckies filled up with fuel, they'd record it in the ledger. It can't be modified or altered, nobody can defraud the company because it's an immutable record!, shouted the sales team. I mean, the truckie could always put the wrong value…

Also if the company just created a simple web/mobile app for truckers to enter data that doesn't have edit and delete functionality it is immutable. Non programmers think immutability is inherent in a system and not something controlled by code. Even if I use a blockchain and cryptography to timestamp it, if I am the one controlling the node, who in the world can prevent me from going in and changing it and time stamping it again with the same old timestamp? And if I create the UI, what stops me from showing whatever I want on the UI?

Re: Web3 is centralized and inefficient

#169

Post by everfree »

philliphaydon wrote: post #158
everfree wrote: post #138

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It doesn't guarantee that. As I said, it guarantees that paper trails are permanent and cannot be fudged after the fact.

So you have a permanent paper trail that cannot be changed, what problem has it solved?

The problem of paper trails being changed. When something goes wrong, if you can't trust your paper trail, you can't attribute fault with certainty.

Without an immutable shared database standard, it's difficult for processes like that to cross company lines. And supply chain is a fancy phrase for processes that cross many company lines.

Re: Web3 is centralized and inefficient

#170

Post by fulafel »

What are some interesting p2p or otherwise decentralized content platforms today that could be next to gain critical mass in users and content?

I know webrtc lets you do things like peertube, webtorrent, and p2p videoconferencing, then we have mastodon and some other social platforms, and various relatively unpopular IM platforms.

And good old email of course, maybe that could even incrementally bootstrap some new usage model eg in IM.

Post reply on HN