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

51–60 of 384 posts

Re: Web3 is expensive P2P

#51

Post by belltaco »

_glass wrote: post #23
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.

you could make social media where the ad revenue is shared with the users. you can already sell art where the platform can vanish (like hicetnunc did) but the artists and users can take their assets to just another platform (like objkt).

That sounds like it'd make social media somehow even worse, by incentivitizing clickbait, flamebait, reposting, fake news and shock posts.

Re: Web3 is expensive P2P

#52

Post by the_other »

diego_moita wrote: post #38

Moxie Marlinspike on Web3 [1]: * "People don’t want to run their own servers, and never will" * "A protocol moves much more slowly than a platform" [1] https://moxie.org/2022/01/07/web3-first-impressions.html

I admit, I've not read Moxie's post.

IMO "people" would run many of their own servers if it were easy. At the moment, it's not easy because it's not easy to safely open up to the public a server running on your computer/phone, or home network. ISPs benefit from making this hard, and (as best I understand it) the IP4 address space isn't wide enough anyway.

If "people" could run servers on their phones, safely, with minimal effort, they would. They would, because it would be so minimal effort that no-one needed to think "I'm running a server". They should only need to think "I'm available now" and that be it.

Re: Web3 is expensive P2P

#53

Post by Karunamon »

kkielhofner wrote: post #35
Karunamon wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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

Most NFT content is hosted with HTTP(s). Many NFTs that reference an IPFS url point to a specific IPFS gateway run by the creator as opposed to a “standard” IPFS url with ipfs:// I know this because I have a product that indexes various blockchains and the referenced content.

Wow, the situation is even more dire than I thought. So by and large, the decentralization benefit is completely off the table for most NFTs.

Would you be willing to share some numbers on what you're seeing? This is valuable information.

Re: Web3 is expensive P2P

#54

Post by LordKeren »

przeor wrote: post #26
lalaland1125 wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> What is the value proposition of web3 to the user? The same value as most other P2P software: illegal activity. Web3 in particular is very useful for running online casinos and ponzi schemes. Note that there is huge potential there for a ton of profit. Casinos make a ton of money.

Quoted post unavailable.

yeah, if you cut out and overlook all the key defining aspects of a Ponzi scheme like the fraud, sure.

Once the government privatizes social security (and similar mandatory retirement programs in other countries), converts it to a for-profit system, encourages speculative “investing”, makes deceptive claims on returns— you’ll be exactly right, they would be the same.

Re: Web3 is expensive P2P

#55

Post by douglaswlance »

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.

Data portability is a huge value prop: Everywhere you sign-in, you already have all of your data.

Is it bad to pay to click, if you earn more from the ads on the page? Along with micro-payments, you also micro-earn.

Re: Web3 is expensive P2P

#56

Post by candiddevmike »

rglullis wrote: post #49
bpeebles wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's just as easy for a game developer to say "eh we're no longer using that blockchain for game assets" or otherwise make your "purchase" (which isn't really a purchase) unusable with a blockchain based solution as it is with current Steam/iOS-based systems. (Probably easier, really.)

It's not about "game assets". It's a about having disintermediated access to the state of the "world". Think of all the stories of startups that offer a product that locks their users and then go to be acquired/shut down by some other bigger company. If the services and the data live on the blockchain, it's guaranteed by design that the users are in control of their own data (no lock in) and that if the company just…

I don't think blockchain is the answer for this. The answer is self-hosting and requiring SaaS companies to offer a self-hosted version.

Re: Web3 is expensive P2P

#57

Post by DanHulton »

rglullis wrote: post #49
bpeebles wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's just as easy for a game developer to say "eh we're no longer using that blockchain for game assets" or otherwise make your "purchase" (which isn't really a purchase) unusable with a blockchain based solution as it is with current Steam/iOS-based systems. (Probably easier, really.)

It's not about "game assets". It's a about having disintermediated access to the state of the "world". Think of all the stories of startups that offer a product that locks their users and then go to be acquired/shut down by some other bigger company. If the services and the data live on the blockchain, it's guaranteed by design that the users are in control of their own data (no lock in) and that if the company just…

All of these games run on centralized servers, though. You can "own" whatever assets you want on the blockchain, when that server goes down, they stop having any use at all.

Re: Web3 is expensive P2P

#58

Post by web4 »

the_other wrote: post #47
web4 wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Game devs could offer transferable content without stores if they stopped using the stores (ok, admittedly, iOS makes this harder). Web3 has nothing to do with this.

it has everything to do with it:

1. you purchase digital items with centralized payment processors like VISA

2. the asset is transferred to your centralized iOS/Steam account. you do not "own" it, the company owns it. if you are banned from Steam, you lose all your games and game purchases.

web3 is asking how these two things can be changed to remove the intermediary.

the best frame for this is not "web3 ideals are not worth pursuing" but "how can we make web3 ideals feasibly work"

Re: Web3 is expensive P2P

#59

Post by can16358p »

cnity wrote: post #43
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…

It is my (largely uninformed) opinion that the greatest barrier to an open web is the difficulty in securing a static address for a device that remains consistent regardless of the currently connected gateway address. So much of what third party web services actually do is simply offering a static address for routing traffic.

If IPv6 adoption goes at this pace, crypto adoption for addressing will probably pass it anyway.

Re: Web3 is expensive P2P

#60

Post by Double_a_92 »

przeor wrote: post #26
lalaland1125 wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> What is the value proposition of web3 to the user? The same value as most other P2P software: illegal activity. Web3 in particular is very useful for running online casinos and ponzi schemes. Note that there is huge potential there for a ton of profit. Casinos make a ton of money.

Quoted post unavailable.

What about it? Everybody knows it's a Ponzi and at some point people agreed to it. It's not lying to you saying it will magically create money for you if you invest. You take the money from younger contributors, to give it to older contributors by design. And that kinda makes sense because the people at the top eventually die and it's everybodys turn at some point.
Post reply on HN