This post is poorly written by someone severely misinformed or deliberately dishonest and at best seriously naive about how technoology is adopted and evolves. Sad that people would give it any attention.
Web3 is centralized and inefficient
741–750 of 769 posts
Re: Web3 is centralized and inefficient
#742Earlier quoted context omitted.
Does your bank deal in dollars or its own token? Is a cryptocurrency exchange more like a bank or a currency?
It's an exchange, the cryptocurrency itself is the bank. Banks don't require dollars or any fiat currency to exist, hell they invented paper money. The major difference is that banks had the advantage of gold and other precious metals as a pre-existing common medium of exchange. Cryptocurrencies need a verifiable way to say that you transferred X value from chain A to chain B. I'm sure this is a solvable problem.
> a mechanism that allows two completely unrelated & unconnected blockchains to transfer tokens between eachother
Atomic swaps already exist.
I still have no idea what that has to do with the nonsensical metaphor "a blockchain is a bank"
Re: Web3 is centralized and inefficient
#743Earlier quoted context omitted.
That's not why making an NFT out of the ticket is interesting. It's interesting because I can, for example, resell my Woodstock ticket on an open market.
Only if the ticket seller wants you to be able to do that. Remember, it's trivially easy to follow transactions on the block chain. So the ticket seller can see whether an NFT has been resold, and can just refuse to honour it. Or only honour the first wallet it was in, regardless of whether it is still there or not.
I'm talking about it as a collectors item.
Re: Web3 is centralized and inefficient
#744While this forum has lots of people who are into tech and finance inexplicably getting their panties in a bunch over crypto, YCombinator keeps incubating crypto startups and making big money...
Re: Web3 is centralized and inefficient
#745Earlier quoted context omitted.
That's not why making an NFT out of the ticket is interesting. It's interesting because I can, for example, resell my Woodstock ticket on an open market.
So ticket scalping. This was never desirable to anyone except the reseller in the first place. Concert goers hate scalpers, arrangers hate scalpers and the reseller adds no value to their service. I don't see how it's the least bit interesting.
I'm not talking about scalping.
Woodstock was a legendary event.
The tickets would now be considered collectors items.
Re: Web3 is centralized and inefficient
#746> 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…
> Yep. It is a GUI ontop of their smart contracts (public access backend code). You don't have to use their GUI. You should inspect their smart contracts for centralized control, or at least look to see if anyone else has. There is an opportunity to inspire people with the tools to know what to look for, even if its absurd to suggest people actually do all the analysis themselves.
On Polygon OpenSea took an open-access marketplace (0x V3) and gave only themselves the permission to interact with the mutable functions (e.g. filling orders). The very definition of centralized.
Re: Web3 is centralized and inefficient
#747Earlier 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
> that is a question in good faith
More of a statement on how cryptocurrency projects like to make a lot of promises and how their followers eat it up without having the necessary expertise to evaluate the claims. See e.g. "one more year" on proof-of-stake for ethereum for...how many years now?
Re: Web3 is centralized and inefficient
#748Earlier quoted context omitted.
Only if the ticket seller wants you to be able to do that. Remember, it's trivially easy to follow transactions on the block chain. So the ticket seller can see whether an NFT has been resold, and can just refuse to honour it. Or only honour the first wallet it was in, regardless of whether it is still there or not.
I'm talking about it as a collectors item.
That is somewhat interesting. But see https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30776567
Re: Web3 is centralized and inefficient
#749Earlier quoted context omitted.
So ticket scalping. This was never desirable to anyone except the reseller in the first place. Concert goers hate scalpers, arrangers hate scalpers and the reseller adds no value to their service. I don't see how it's the least bit interesting.
It's interesting because it could be _my_ profit! Nevermind the society or the environment. If money can be made, money shall be made, no matter how shady a business /s
'Scalping' ticket is actually useful for society, to be honest.
But yeah, everyone involved likes to say that they hate scalpers. So no one will do anything to help them.
Re: Web3 is centralized and inefficient
#750Earlier quoted context omitted.
What's the incentive for the ticket seller to enable that?
Royalties. The ticket seller can set that and every time the ticket is resold, they will get % of that sale. For an artist that would mean they can sell a ticket with % royalty set and then profit from future sales on an ongoing basis.
Why not auction the tickets off in the first place?