Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Web3 is expensive P2P

netfuture.ch

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 384 posts

Re: Web3 is expensive P2P

#11

Post by moolcool »

andsoitis wrote: post #3

> P2P never made it to the mainstream; instead, centralized systems still (or, again? even more?) dominate the landscape. So, because it failed, should we try Web3? I doubt it, as it is more likely to fail, due to higher complexity and more dependencies. One major reason decentralized has a hard time is because standards, public protocols cannot be innovated on rapidly. Or at least, new iterations cannot be deployed…

I don't think that's right. Using decentralized protocols doesn't necessarily imply decentralized authority or use of those protocols. Skype used to be P2P, and the mothership would still push updates to end users to ensure everyone was using the correct protocol. Decentralized protocols do create some technical challenges, but they also alleviate others (scaling, for example).

Even when that's not the case, like with bittorrent, there's tons of innovation. DHT Protocol, for example, was a game changer.

Re: Web3 is expensive P2P

#12

Post by Karunamon »

web4 wrote: post #6
api wrote: post #4

No because it's mostly not P2P. A lot of it is centralized. There are central servers behind things like MetaMask or hosting most NFT content.

you can point MetaMask to a different RPC endpoint or your own local node. it is like suggesting BitTorrent is centralized tech because many users download torrents on a centralized website. most NFTs (of value) are using IPFS or Arweave not a URL.

IPFS only enables decentralization, it doesn't guarantee it. I'd be willing to bet most NFT content is only pinned by the exchange.

Re: Web3 is expensive P2P

#13

Post by outside1234 »

5350-uiop-1130 wrote: post #7

What is the value proposition of web3 to the user? JS web apps offloaded the compute and memory onto the browser/client, web3 to offload storage costs onto the user. You will up pay for every click. web3 and metaverse feels so dystopian. but the young generations that were raised by tiktok will probably accept it.

The user can money launder their money via NFT wash sales.

Re: Web3 is expensive P2P

#14

Post by dangerlibrary »

andsoitis wrote: post #3

> P2P never made it to the mainstream; instead, centralized systems still (or, again? even more?) dominate the landscape. So, because it failed, should we try Web3? I doubt it, as it is more likely to fail, due to higher complexity and more dependencies. One major reason decentralized has a hard time is because standards, public protocols cannot be innovated on rapidly. Or at least, new iterations cannot be deployed…

Yes. For more thoughts on this, I'd recommend reading Moxie's expansion on these ideas here.

https://signal.org/blog/the-ecosystem-is-moving/

Re: Web3 is expensive P2P

#15

Post by anonymous0 »

5350-uiop-1130 wrote: post #7

What is the value proposition of web3 to the user? JS web apps offloaded the compute and memory onto the browser/client, web3 to offload storage costs onto the user. You will up pay for every click. web3 and metaverse feels so dystopian. but the young generations that were raised by tiktok will probably accept it.

Honest question: Is there something specific about TikTok technology/usage pattern paving the way for distopy acceptance or it's just the same concept of facebook/instagram/Twitter but with a younger audience?

Re: Web3 is expensive P2P

#16

Post by exo762 »

5350-uiop-1130 wrote: post #7

What is the value proposition of web3 to the user? JS web apps offloaded the compute and memory onto the browser/client, web3 to offload storage costs onto the user. You will up pay for every click. web3 and metaverse feels so dystopian. but the young generations that were raised by tiktok will probably accept it.

> What is the value proposition of web3 to the user?

Potential of paying for services and being able to require privacy in return? It is not a choice one can make with many web2 services (e.g. google).

As for "blockchains are transparent and can't offer no privacy" - just a question of time. Tech is already here (zkps, mpc, etc).

Re: Web3 is expensive P2P

#17

Post by web4 »

5350-uiop-1130 wrote: post #7

What is the value proposition of web3 to the user? JS web apps offloaded the compute and memory onto the browser/client, web3 to offload storage costs onto the user. You will up pay for every click. web3 and metaverse feels so dystopian. but the young generations that were raised by tiktok will probably accept it.

web3 is not "pay for every click." value prop is disintermediation and decentralization. like purchasing a game asset, and not having it tied only to your iOS or Steam account.

Re: Web3 is expensive P2P

#18

Post by VGltZUNvbnN1 »

andsoitis wrote: post #3

> P2P never made it to the mainstream; instead, centralized systems still (or, again? even more?) dominate the landscape. So, because it failed, should we try Web3? I doubt it, as it is more likely to fail, due to higher complexity and more dependencies. One major reason decentralized has a hard time is because standards, public protocols cannot be innovated on rapidly. Or at least, new iterations cannot be deployed…

I still believe the P2P version of Skype was better. Centralized Skype may have more features, but the P2P version of Skype was better at the core functionality of video and audio calling. It was also more private and secure, since your calls were not routed through a central server.

Re: Web3 is expensive P2P

#19

Post by sergiomattei »

anonymous0 wrote: post #15
5350-uiop-1130 wrote: post #7

What is the value proposition of web3 to the user? JS web apps offloaded the compute and memory onto the browser/client, web3 to offload storage costs onto the user. You will up pay for every click. web3 and metaverse feels so dystopian. but the young generations that were raised by tiktok will probably accept it.

Honest question: Is there something specific about TikTok technology/usage pattern paving the way for distopy acceptance or it's just the same concept of facebook/instagram/Twitter but with a younger audience?

It’s just a low-tier generalization about newer generation. Nothing to analyze here.

There is nothing about TikTok that makes my generation mindless Web3 drones.

Post reply on HN