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

111–120 of 384 posts

Re: Web3 is expensive P2P

#111

Post by eric_cc »

moolcool wrote: post #98
axg11 wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Some benefits that I think web3 can bring to the user: - Universal login: An alternative to "Sign in with Google/Apple/XYZ" that can't be denied by a corporation. There are countless examples of these companies deactivating accounts for questionable reasons. - Permissionless composability: I'm not sure how to word this one better. If a developer wants to build on top of blockchain data, they can. No need to apply for…

> Universal login You can have universal login with MetaMask, sure, but that functionality isn't reliant on a blockchain. It's decades-old public key cryptography. > Ownership in communities.... The difference is that existing platforms don't let you build on those communities outside of their walled garden But successful internet communities do everything in their power to remain walled gardens. What could they poss…

> what would Reddit gain

I think you nailed it. It’s a victory for USERS - owning your own assets in a way that does not require you to trust the platform. It’s not so great for centralized platforms.

Re: Web3 is expensive P2P

#112

Post by dgellow »

plsbenice34 wrote: post #109
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 will up pay for every click Much less dystopian to me to pay rather than indirectly pay by being a data mining product and selling my mental real estate.

Cannot they do both, you pay per action AND your data are sold? What blocks companies from gathering user data in a web3 application and resell them?

Re: Web3 is expensive P2P

#113

Post by Feriti »

damon_c wrote: post #94
Feriti wrote: post #89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And who else will then operate the web3 infrastructure? Instead of the Security team at Google, their ddos service and OnCall experts we have whom now? Some miners? Perfectly written Blockchain code? You sound like those things are just free.

As a member of an open source community involved in one or more blockchain projects, I can attest that many of these things literally are indeed free.

An open source community can do a lot and not everything.

I'm not aware of any opensource community being happy at doing on call.

Or end customer support.

Or even marketing.

And if we look at successful opensource projects, than we have companies behind them.

Re: Web3 is expensive P2P

#114

Post by intrasight »

What Web3 should be is a) identity, and b) digital payment.

I am of the opinion that the state should provide digital identity service. Estonia is a good example, from what I've heard, of a state that is doing this effectively.

As for digital payment, Brazil seems to be in the lead now with Pix.

I see no valid role for private companies nor blockchains in providing digital ID and currency services.

Re: Web3 is expensive P2P

#115

Post by Feriti »

hypertele-Xii wrote: post #96
Feriti wrote: post #89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And who else will then operate the web3 infrastructure? Instead of the Security team at Google, their ddos service and OnCall experts we have whom now? Some miners? Perfectly written Blockchain code? You sound like those things are just free.

Internet Service Providers? Hosting Providers? Literally anyone from their closet? Google isn't the Internet, no matter how badly they want you to believe that.

From their closet? What? They develop web3 software in the closet?

Re: Web3 is expensive P2P

#116

Post by freeone3000 »

mpeg wrote: post #74
freeone3000 wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

People were fine "running their own servers" back when Skype was peer-to-peer. Or when Team Fortress 2 let you play with your friends.

People are also fine running their own Discord servers, just like they did IRC channels/networks back in the day.

You're not running discord servers on your own hardware, though. You don't have any of the data locally and it all goes through Discord's server. Actual decentralized services are fine as long as users can run it as easily as they can run a centralized application.

Re: Web3 is expensive P2P

#117

Post by enos_feedler »

axg11 wrote: post #99
Feriti wrote: post #89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And who else will then operate the web3 infrastructure? Instead of the Security team at Google, their ddos service and OnCall experts we have whom now? Some miners? Perfectly written Blockchain code? You sound like those things are just free.

I'm not sure I understand your question, genuinely. There are of course costs for the benefits that come with web3: protocols are slow to evolve, and infrastructure is less efficient when we require a distributed consensus. Anyone that thinks "Web 2" or centralized systems will disappear is silly, there will always be situations where the costs of web3 are greater than the benefits. On the other hand, it's equally si…

The difference is there are relatively fewer static html pages. There wont be relatively fewer web2 deployments vs web3. Itll be mostly web2

Re: Web3 is expensive P2P

#118

Post by chrisco255 »

intrasight wrote: post #114

What Web3 should be is a) identity, and b) digital payment. I am of the opinion that the state should provide digital identity service. Estonia is a good example, from what I've heard, of a state that is doing this effectively. As for digital payment, Brazil seems to be in the lead now with Pix. I see no valid role for private companies nor blockchains in providing digital ID and currency services.

> I am of the opinion that the state should provide digital identity service

No thanks. Privacy is a human right.

Re: Web3 is expensive P2P

#119

Post by dmitriid »

birracerveza wrote: post #78
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.

That's not web3. Web3 should feel no different to the end user than web2, except for the fact they "sign in" via their wallet (Metamask) instead of legacy login mechanisms (Username+password or Google/FB sign ins). Users shouldn't even pay for gas. Look at orbis.club for an early example of proper web3. What we saw up until now is not "true" web3, but simply web2 masquerading as such and using web3 as a marketing buz…

> Web3 should feel no different to the end user than web2

Yes, yes it would feel different. Because every action requires the user to pay.

Re: Web3 is expensive P2P

#120

Post by the_snooze »

axg11 wrote: post #110
moolcool wrote: post #98

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Universal login You can have universal login with MetaMask, sure, but that functionality isn't reliant on a blockchain. It's decades-old public key cryptography. > Ownership in communities.... The difference is that existing platforms don't let you build on those communities outside of their walled garden But successful internet communities do everything in their power to remain walled gardens. What could they poss…

> But successful internet communities do everything in their power to remain walled gardens. What could they possibly have to gain by doing this? Like what would Reddit gain by moving Reddit Gold to the blockchain? We have to reimagine everything, I don't think a successful web3 platform will emerge from simply tacking on tokens to existing platforms. Successful internet communities become walled gardens to protect a…

>We have to reimagine everything, I don't think a successful web3 platform will emerge from simply tacking on tokens to existing platforms.

Greenfield projects are easy because they wave away the real complexities of integrating with existing systems. But those existing platforms already provide a lot of tangible value. If you want users, you can't just ignore that.

Post reply on HN