Live data from Hacker News

Web3 is centralized and inefficient

neelc.org

711–720 of 769 posts

Re: Web3 is centralized and inefficient

#711
post #412

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…

So if we cross out the decentralizaton part, which problem does web3 solve over web2? Why do we need it? Honest question.

Not having PayPal lock my funds based on some faulty algorithm and refusing to communicate with me for months.

Re: Web3 is centralized and inefficient

#712

> 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…

> It could just as easily be "This isn't decentralized! Let me fix that!" First I would like to be convinced that centralization is actually a problem. Most things in our daily lives are centralized: Power Generation and Distribution, Water Distribution, the Logistics which put food in our stores, Infrastructure setup and maintenance, to name just a few. Yes, even our financial systems work fine. I get my paycheck on…

My place is on well and septic. I like the setup, and the yard space for this creates limits to residential density. I'm possibly not typical.

Re: Web3 is centralized and inefficient

#713
post #281
post #270

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Perhaps it's a digital frame for a digital picture? (As opposed to a physical frame for a digital picture?)

Again, how is an NFT a picture frame? Is a URL a picture frame?

Maybe? Not sure how the original commenter meant their metaphor.

Re: Web3 is centralized and inefficient

#714
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…

In a nutshell you are saying decentralized advocates forget about the bell curve of "effort" humans are willing to spend.

Isn't this just a design problem, as opposed to an intrinsic problem with decentralization?

I believe that we can design convenient decentralized systems. We definitely have not done this yet, but that does not mean this is an unachievable goal.

There are also human factors which currently are a problem too. The massive increase in people using internet technology (via smartphones obv.) Was not accompanied by massive increase in technology education/expertise.

The early users of the internet were extremely technically capable in comparison, raised on microcomputers. Getting online was a hassle, but presented a fun challenge to these people.

Not only are today's platforms essentially closed, the average user has a lot of difficulty understanding all the layers required to do something like say, set up an email server. This is a major drain of effort and it's just one piece of the networked tech people take for granted.

However if there were simple alternatives which could be setup and used "effortlessly" people would use them.

Web3 is an unfulfilled promise, so far, and is in a phase where scams and bullshit are rife.

It's unlikely that people will perpetually be satisfied with the centralized services, especially as they continue to degrade in service and ethical quality. A process which may be part of the equation which leads to better decentralized systems which are also secure and simple to deploy & use.

I think the interest is there, the technology isn't yet of course.

Re: Web3 is centralized and inefficient

#715

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.

> No need to expose yourself, possible anonimity and most important one That is an advantage if you're going to engage in behavior any reasonable person would despise you for. > the absolute lack of need of a third party If you're scalping tickets, you are the third party.

Anonimity and privacy on internet are a right and you don't need to do shady stuff to enjoy them and outside of the immediate risk caused by doxing oneself when having a heavily valued crypto/nft portfolio I agree that it's not always needed. It still should be an option though as when selling valuable stuff p2p some protection is always appreciated.

I don't really get the part on how selling something you own p2p makes you a third party and I don't care about the 2nd hand tickets market, I'm only intrested in a safe decentralized p2p market

Re: Web3 is centralized and inefficient

#716
post #540

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> proprietary network The statement was protocols, not networks. Not all protocols involve networks. But let's assume you did mean protocol here and not network. > it seems clear that for "chat, video conferencing, file sharing" (as well as social media), proprietary networks [protocols] are more much much more popular than standardized protocols. No that's categorically false. HTTP came into existence in 1989 and HT…

I think we're talking about different things. I'm not sure if you know we are talking about different things are are doing it intentionally, or if we are just talking past each other. I can't say for sure what vishnugupta meant, but what I thought when I read their comment are: * Most people's chat goes over things like Slack or MS Teams -- proprietary protocols. Not the open protocols that do exist like IRC. * Most…

Thank you so much for taking time and effort to elaborate what I exactly meant.

FTP is the closest file sharing protocol I could think of when I wrote my comment above.

Moxie touched on this topic in his article about web3, where he compared and contrasted protocols Vs platform. He explains why he believes platforms, once they gain a big enough distribution, are inherently at an advantage because they can change and adopt fast.

Re: Web3 is centralized and inefficient

#717

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 lon…

> Everyone should leave CEXs to get on DEXs and learn about DeFi That is not going to happen, for the same reasons why most people don't dig their own wells, learn carpentry to make their own furniture, or weave their own cloth and learn how to tailor clothes. Every complex enough system will always have centralized points, aka. gatekeepers. That is how human society self-organises.

> That is not going to happen IT's actually being worked on, it's something sometimes refered as a "layer 3" even if it's not realy one when you look at what are layers 1 and 2 but the goal of this logical "layer" is to make abstraction of everything, make crosschain needs and moves absolutely transparent. It's one big point for mass adoption and great thinkers and workers know that and are already working on that.

>Every complex enough system will always have centralized points, aka. gatekeepers. That's where the problem is. 3rd partys have been introduced for security reasons but are nowadays far from it and that's what some people are actually fighting for. An autonomous system where the only pseudo 3rd party is an impartial public registry

Re: Web3 is centralized and inefficient

#719
post #629

If you store your webapp on IPFS, and connect to the blockchain. Then its truly decentralized. We need browsers to support IPFS... Even when blockchain fails, IPFS will be a big. Especially if we are going to be a multi-planetary species.

Actually browsers don't need any new features. All you need is a proxy that can decide to fetch resources on www vs. ipfs. I did a small PoC with mitmproxy where if the subdomain is ipfs I fetch the resource from ipfs instead of the web. worked great, also worked without the proxy because I hosted it on the www as well. I also did a youtube-dl proxy: First time it goes to youtube and in the background I fire up youtu…

You mean a local proxy? That makes sense. Should be part of the OS then ;-)

Re: Web3 is centralized and inefficient

#720

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It could just as easily be "This isn't decentralized! Let me fix that!" First I would like to be convinced that centralization is actually a problem. Most things in our daily lives are centralized: Power Generation and Distribution, Water Distribution, the Logistics which put food in our stores, Infrastructure setup and maintenance, to name just a few. Yes, even our financial systems work fine. I get my paycheck on…

that will probably never happen. There is always an ongoing fight between decentralization (enduser, humanistic approach) and centralization (efficient, dictorship, monopolization approach). Centralization will almost always be more efficient but has "security" flaws in the form of bad faith actors while also acting as the central authority. Basically see any form of dictatorship over multiple generations. Ofcourse t…

> Centralization will almost always be more efficient but has "security" flaws in the form of bad faith actors while also acting as the central authority.

And de-centralization has security flaws in the form of more difficult or impossible oversight, which can allow bad-faith actors to pursue their goals with impunity.

Neither paradigm is perfect, each has its flaws. Knowing that a system is de- or centralized, tells us exactly nothing about the morals of the people using it.

Post reply on HN