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

171–180 of 769 posts

Re: Web3 is centralized and inefficient

#171

Post by systoll »

cmdli wrote: post #78
bigbonch wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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...

I just don't see how that use case couldn't have been more easily served with a boring old centralized database. Why do you need a trustless system where all the users are either in-house or contractually obligated to not screw each other over?

Here’s a whitepaper on it https://uark.app.box.com/s/f7v6rk7xnwkjaetws7e1yaodomg883fi .

The merkle tree part of blockchains is absolutely valuable here… but that’s kind of where it ends. There’s no real consensus mechanism when there are 'merge conflicts', it needs manual overrides.

It’s more like git than bitcoin – and it helps them for similar reasons to why git helps us even when there’s a canonical source. People go offline and can’t sync immediately to the master store; people want to write events down now and deal with discrepancies later; disagreements are reified and can be formally reviewed, etc.

As best I can tell, it seems other aspects of blockchains just came along for the ride. The best open source code for their use case included it, and using it was better than building from scratch. The decentralisation is all but coded out – the central authority is the only one that can authorise transactions or resolve a 'merge conflict'.

Re: Web3 is centralized and inefficient

#172

Post by TobyTheDog123 »

mccorrinall wrote: post #167
TobyTheDog123 wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

I can, actually.

Those who invested two years ago have likely already made more money than anyone investing now can.

Bitcoin was $20 like… 10 years ago? What price would BTC have to reach for you to get the same level of return if you invested now compared to back then?

Re: Web3 is centralized and inefficient

#173

Post by alexb_ »

eek2121 wrote: post #162
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.

As it turns out, rational people actually want to cut costs. This is true even down to the individual level. And time is money, so nobody wants to spend the effort to be decentralized when a centralized system exists that takes less money. Rational choices are what bring centralized systems into existence.

Re: Web3 is centralized and inefficient

#174

Post by v_p_n_p_v »

What's amazing to me is that if you want to find any of these decentralized systems, you have to trust some centralized entity identifying them as the true system. For example, want to download MetaMask? How will you find it? Google MetaMask and trust that Google will have filtered out all the fake MetaMask wallets set up to steal your money. Want to lend money on a DeFi platform like Anchor? Again, Google and hope to God their fake counterpart didn't figure out how to fake its way to the top of the SER page. People have lost tons of money this way.

If only there was a trustless, decentralized, immutable, database of sorts that could be used as the source of truth... thegraph.com supposedly wants to do this, but it wants me to connect my wallet and again I'm not sure I'm on the "right" website...

Re: Web3 is centralized and inefficient

#175

Post by janjones »

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…

One problem is that decentralization sometimes doesn't scale. It's cool to have completely decentralized email, but once many people use it, there will be lots of spam, and it's hard dealing with that in a decentralized way, I guess.

Re: Web3 is centralized and inefficient

#176

Post by cuteboy19 »

jeroenhd wrote: post #146
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/

There are some use cases for blockhains, namely cryptocurrencies and their unregulated nature. There have been plenty of times that I didn't want to hand over my name and address for an online purchase, but the traditional payment systems aren't set up for privacy. Payment providers also discriminate against certain aspects of society, such as sex work. The fees an adult content provider needs to pay are astronomical…

Just ban crypto advertising. That way people who actually need crypto for whatever reason can use it, and Matt Damon can't convince your aunt to throw away her inheritance into some shitcoin

Re: Web3 is centralized and inefficient

#178

Post by cuteboy19 »

everfree wrote: post #138
philliphaydon wrote: post #133

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How does block chain guarentee that something going from A to C via B is not tampered with in anyway?

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

Auditing is a core feature of most modern RDBMS systems.

Anyways the reason why it's immutable is that it's public so everyone knows every transaction. You can just have a normal db and maker it public. Blockchain is overkill in this case.

Also this is a much more niche problem than "supply chains"

Re: Web3 is centralized and inefficient

#179

Post by cuteboy19 »

hunterb123 wrote: post #80
hannasanarion wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A public ledger is not inherently valuable. A trusted ledger is valuable, but a ledger doesn't have to be public to be trusted. When I swipe my card at the grocery store, I'm not shaking in my boots with my fingers crossed, doubting whether the transaction will be recorded as transmitted or not. If for some looney toons secret agent reason you need a transaction to be public, you can tweet a picture of the receipt. O…

Blockchains can be public or private, the key is they are distributed ledgers.

Private blockchains are entirely useless. If you already have a permissioned system, there is not point in using a trustless and permission less database
Post reply on HN