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

501–510 of 769 posts

Re: Web3 is centralized and inefficient

#501

Post by Kalium »

OrlandoHakim wrote: post #471

It is hard to advocate for the value of decentralized systems without sounding like a hand-waving conspiracy theorist. The benefits of decentralization do come at a cost of efficiency and throughput and they are often harder to quantify or justify unless one takes a harder look at the fully loaded cost of centralization. As an example, consider the fact that MacDonald’s is by far the most prolific restaurant in the w…

> I would argue that monoculture and food homogenization engineered to maximize calories out per $ in have come at the cost of diversity.

I think the problem with this isn't that you come across as hand-waving. The problem with this line of argument is that there's no developed case for why anyone should care or value this particular presupposed diversity being lost.

One could argue that a profuse diversity was lost when screws, nuts, and bolts converged on a set of broadly standardized sizes. Yet few seem to lament this. Why is this different in important ways from bananas? Which is bitcoin more like?

Re: Web3 is centralized and inefficient

#502

Post by pharke »

darkerside wrote: post #479
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…

It's creative destruction. When you decentralize, you are destroying institutions and tradition that are slowing us down. That doesn't mean you don't want new ones to rise up in their place. It's not that centralization is bad, it's just that _sometimes you centralize the wrong thing_ and this is how you fix it.

I think it's more of a Goldilocks problem. Too little centralization and things are nearly impossible to do because you have to host your own email, website, blockchain, VOIP, photos, etc. Too much centralization and you have a single dinosaur of a corporation controlling everything and probably doing it poorly for a high cost to the consumer. You need something in the middle where you have ample competition, choice, and variety.

Re: Web3 is centralized and inefficient

#503

Post by DennisP »

hannasanarion wrote: post #79
dvt wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I know you're being a bit snarky, but the miners voted on that decision and decided, collectively, to fork. It's decentralized in the sense that there's no central mandate, and everyone needs to agree with a decision or that decision will ultimately fizzle.

Yeah, and then nearly half of the miners kept going with the old fork anyway. On Ethereum Classic, the theives who scammed $400 million worth of 2016 ETH from the founders, valued at who knows what now, still have that money, and they have spent it, and it's still considered good on the ETH Classic chain.

ETH Classic's current price is $47 (compared to ETH at about $3000). The DAO hacker got 3.6 million ETH, so its current value on the Classic chain is $169 million.

Re: Web3 is centralized and inefficient

#504

Post by DennisP »

hannasanarion wrote: post #81
ipnon wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is like saying Heartbleed is proof the Web will never work. You can't even guarantee secure connections! What will happen when the spy agencies start using these?! Decentralization isn't proof a system has no bugs, it's proof the system works without an authoritative governance, which I will remind you is the topic at hand in this particular comment section. Is crypto a scam? Maybe, maybe not. If you think so, j…

Heartbleed didn't cause tens of thousands of financial transactions totalling billions of dollars to be retroactively reverted with a technically guaranteed lack of recourse to the people whose accounts were drained as a result.

And neither did the DAO fork, which did not roll back the chain.

Re: Web3 is centralized and inefficient

#505

Post by Sargos »

thr0wawayf00 wrote: post #26
ipnon wrote: post #7

Some platforms like Ethereum are completely decentralized. You forfeit some of this decentralization bit by bit when using MetaMask, OpenSea or Alchemy, but the platform itself is still decentralized. The Web is completely decentralized, by you forfeit some of this decentralization bit by bit when using Paypal, Facebook, or AWS. The trend in technology has always been to trade control for convenience. This doesn't st…

> When these occur it will be the decentralized blockchains like Ethereum with failsafes in place to survive, and it's the centralized blockchains like Binance that will implode. Didn't Ethereum recently disclose a major settlement vulnerability discovered by a researcher that could've forced a hard fork had this person chosen to exploit it? He got a multi-million dollar bounty for it I believe. This kind of certain…

That was a bug in Optimism not Ethereum. No funds on Ethereum were at risk.

Optimism is a separate project which runs a separate layer 2 network that helps run blockchain transactions faster. It uses Ethereum as its data store but is separate in most other ways.

Re: Web3 is centralized and inefficient

#506

Post by preseinger »

vmception wrote: post #216
ShamelessC wrote: post #209

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Node software still sucks! It can be improved! Talk is cheap. Show me the code.

Not sure what you mean or expect, but pretending - I mean assuming - that is a question in good faith, then for EVMs, I would start with Erigon https://github.com/ledgerwatch/erigon

Every time someone on a discussion forum identifies a fundamental problem with the web3 space, it's inevitable that someone will reply with a link to an essentially arbitrary project and claim that it solves that problem. I've never seen the same project linked twice in this way, it's always brand new, and usually from a group I've never heard of, either. Just wild.

Re: Web3 is centralized and inefficient

#507

Post by james4k »

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…

More broadly, any decentralized system that interacts with the process of capital accumulation will centralize, as this is an emergent feature of capitalism.

Re: Web3 is centralized and inefficient

#508

Post by rax0m »

v_p_n_p_v wrote: post #174

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 t…

Proof of Work is the source of truth [0]. That is why Proof of Stake cannot work. You are describing one of the biggest of the problems with PoS perfectly.

[0] https://dergigi.com/2021/01/14/bitcoin-is-time/

Re: Web3 is centralized and inefficient

#509

Post by dmitriid »

jcbrand wrote: post #427
dmitriid wrote: post #401

Earlier quoted context omitted.

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30776666 Free market as imagined by libertarians can only exist in the presence of unlimited resources and magic.

You have it backwards. Markets exist because of scarcity, not because of abundance. If something is available in unlimited abundance, there's no need of a market for it.

I don't think I got it backwards. This is the original statement: "In a proper market, it is impossible to resell because the sales price is the production price. So if the free-market price of the ticket is higher than the sales price, people should be producing additional Woodstocks until the prices match".

The only free market where this is possible is a magical place where there are unlimited resources and ability to create new Woodstocks at the snap of a finger.

Re: Web3 is centralized and inefficient

#510

Post by 0xRolex »

usrbinbash wrote: post #369
0xRolex wrote: post #350

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No need to expose yourself, possible anonimity and most important one, the absolute lack of need of a third party which is the thing that most find intresting about blockchains usecases.

Except the most common way to do blockchain transactions are broker services which do require user information. This, combined with the fact that the blockchain is an immutable public ledger (meaning any transaction can be traced back indefinitely), and there goes anonymity.

By brokers you mean Centralised Exchanges ? If yes I agree it's an aberation as we've with recently with Russia's problems people getting banned from it because these exchanges are bounded to obey country's laws. Everyone should leave CEXs to get on DEXs and learn about DeFi but as cool as it can be it's everything but userfriendly and as it is it'll never make it to public adoption. About tracing transactions as long as you don't dox yourself everything people can have about a wallet being yours is suspicions and there's always services to make it shady like tornadocash or anonimity oriented blockchains
Post reply on HN