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

451–460 of 769 posts

Re: Web3 is centralized and inefficient

#451

Post by lfkdev »

eternityforest wrote: post #429
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…

If blockchain had never been invented, we'd be a lot farther ahead. BitTorrent proves the idea can work. And Tox is already totally usable, aside from it's mobile data usage. Federation is the other problem. It's decentralized without real end user benefits other that a bit of censorship resistance, within the limits of the hosting company. It doesn't add reliability or offline communications on the LAN.

"a bit of censorship resistance"

tell that to the russians right now, or to all the other 3. world countrys whose only hope for usable currency is bitcoin

Re: Web3 is centralized and inefficient

#452

Post by UncleMeat »

neelc wrote: post #103
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…

This. The sad thing is that people like the convenience of centralized systems. Humans are lazy. They'll go with the #1 option, even if it means building a centralized monopoly. I should've made this point clearer. Note: I am the article's author.

This isn't laziness. This is different priorities. Few people think that decentralized systems are an important thing in and of themselves. Laziness would be believing the decentralization is good without working to achieve it.

Re: Web3 is centralized and inefficient

#453

Post by UncleMeat »

vmception wrote: post #39
taywrobel wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You’re falling into the same trap as tech enthusiasts in web1. Sure, you could scan blockchains and extract NFT data yourself, and sure you could run your own node for every blockchain that interests you (paying god only know how much for storage and bandwidth). Just like how in web1 you could run your own email server to handle email and have your own blog server to publish info and your own git server to host your…

But I don't care about that the impractical enthusiast stuff, I care about the bloggers that make these flippant dismissals instead of talking about the impractical things that are possible. I simultaneously observe that the impractical things can be made more practical . For example, Metamask with a non-default RPC node is great compared to using crypto before Metamask. Phantom wallet on Solana is even further impro…

> I simultaneously observe that the impractical things can be made more practical.

I'm not sure this is feasible.

Software tends towards complexity. How many people work on a system that hasn't grown tentacles and increased in complexity over time? And that's with a centralized organizational structure motivating change! Look at how much more complex the blockchain ecosystem has become over the last decade. Sure, individual pain points may become less painful. But I'd be stunned if the overall complexity of the systems didn't increase dramatically over the next decade.

Re: Web3 is centralized and inefficient

#454

Post by UncleMeat »

vmception wrote: post #143
smackeyacky wrote: post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This sort of argument reminds me of the old doctrinaire Marxists, who insisted communism could work if only it could be done without authoritarianism. Turns out Web3, in theory, sounds fine, but the implementations and uses of it all fall back to centralised networks and nefarious purposes. I think it's time to recognise Web3 for what it is: a massive con fronted by people who sell a fantasy of open, decentralised co…

Okay. The disconnect here is what you think that I think web3 to be. I recognize the decentralized capabilities and find it marginally interesting and optional when convenient. I don't think it is a sales pitch. And therefore I dont think the whole concept is a con. I empathize with people that come to the space and products within the space for an inaccurate sales pitch. I like the platforms. I would be fine with an…

> I would be fine with an optional EVM that was not censorship resistant, where I could deploy my existing products on simply because the code was compatible.

This sounds sort of like AWS. Or if you want decentralization then something built on DHTs.

Re: Web3 is centralized and inefficient

#455

Post by aaaaaaaaata »

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…

> It looks like another time consuming hobby.

So did BBS message boards.

Better shut this whole, inefficient pile of gack and hacks down!

Re: Web3 is centralized and inefficient

#456

Post by aaaaaaaaata »

landemva wrote: post #166
TheCowboy wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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.

Can you not you "see" more transactions, faster...?

Re: Web3 is centralized and inefficient

#457

Post by School-Cotton »

everfree wrote: post #134
cardy31 wrote: post #91

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Turns out most people wanting to do international transfers without a middleman are criminals. Regular people are for the most part fine with international transfers going through banks, likely via SWIFT.

I don't know if you've actually tried to send an international wire transfer, but it requires more paperwork/effort, is more expensive, and is less reliable than signing a crypto transaction. Many smaller banks require you to physically drive to the branch and wait in line to send one. They usually cost upwards of $40 and that's before currency conversion, which is done at a rate that may or may not be favorable. Mak…

Your parent never mentioned wires. I send 43 euros from the US to Germany every month with Wise and it costs about a dollar.

Re: Web3 is centralized and inefficient

#458

Post by aaaaaaaaata »

TheCowboy wrote: post #88
xiphias2 wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Regarding Ethereum you’re right, it’s centralized. With Bitcoin I run my node and check the incoming transactions with it whenever I make a big money transfer (for outgoing transactions a full node is not really needed, as I don’t care if the network doesn’t accept it as long as my counterparty does). Running a Bitcoin node is practical (less than a day of running in the background on the first run) if the amount of…

If we limit ourselves to Bitcoin then we're at a sliver of the web3 ecosystem everyone is casting their hopes upon. And Bitcoin in its current state still seems more like a blockchain working prototype and isn't 'feature-ful' enough to replace centralized finance. But proof-of-work's energy consumption is what kills Bitcoin for me. For what it's worth, I consider myself crypto agnostic. If a tech delivers something b…

Cryptocurrency agnostic — thank you. I'm going to borrow.

I don't necessarily like all of the community, current "leaders" etc — I just know a sticky concept when I see it.

Re: Web3 is centralized and inefficient

#459

Post by School-Cotton »

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.

No it doesn’t. Private blockchains aren’t immutable. Whoever controls all the nodes can just edit the blockchain however they want.

Re: Web3 is centralized and inefficient

#460

Post by cdiddy2 »

hda2 wrote: post #72
cdiddy2 wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

web 1 = read web 2 = write web 3 = own

> web 3 = own 1. How would this work for me as a user? Are web 3 "websites" (or whatever constitutes a service or company) not able to retain a copy of my data? Or phrased in another way, what prevents websites from also /owning/ my data? 2. How would this work for me as a service? Aside from my service's domain and internet address which are annoyingly hard to "own", what else is there to own that I don't already ow…

Imagine there is a social media site with a friends list feature. Instead of the site owning the friends social graph there are a few transactions on chain the say who are friends with. The site looks at that data to automatically populate your friends list when you use your web wallet to sign in with them. No username/password logins needed in this world.

The user can update their own social graph completely separate from the site with them having no control over who are are/aren't friends with. Now parts of the site are still centralized meaning that they could ignore whatever is on chain, but in that case its a lot easier for a competitor to start up, the users go over there with their web wallet sign on and boom the social graph is fully imported for them. Can even have parts of their profile/nft profile picture and ENS name come over as well.

I hope that gets the gist of it, and it is still a long way from fully being realized but there are already beginnings with ENS profiles and avatars easily used between sites and lens protocol trying to make the social graph aspect. https://lens.dev/

Post reply on HN