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

171–180 of 384 posts

Re: Web3 is expensive P2P

#171

Post by cecilpl2 »

mpeg wrote: post #72
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.)

You're missing the point, the game developer obviously has to buy into the ecosystem, but the difference is with the current status quo in-app purchases are not really owned by the customers, so even if another game developer wanted to honour their purchases there is no way to interop. Web3 is a pretty good use case for this, and the transaction costs barely add anything if you compare to the cut the platform takes (…

> the difference is with the current status quo in-app purchases are not really owned by the customers, so even if another game developer wanted to honour their purchases there is no way to interop.

Roblox already does this. Your in-game purchases are yours and you can carry them from one game to another.

Platforms outcompete protocols - this is why web2 became centralized.

Re: Web3 is expensive P2P

#172

Post by onebot »

10x-dev wrote: post #149
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.

Story time. About 20 years ago, when dialup was introduced where I grew up, my uncle called me to show him what this new internet thing is. As soon as I opened "yahoo.com", he asked "how am I paying to view Yahoo?". I said you're not paying anybody, you're just paying for the Internet connection. He nodded. I then showed him Hotmail. He kept asking "ok so now, how did they charge me to view this page?". I kept tellin…

I don't see why there can't be a decentralized ad platform that monetizes other decentralized web3 apps.

Re: Web3 is expensive P2P

#173

Post by agentultra »

bodge5000 wrote: post #153
agentultra wrote: post #122

I'll just leave this here [0] I don't disagree that the concentration of web architecture into the hands of a small number of big corps is a bad thing. I just don't see the solution being a purely technical one. There are market forces and reasons for that consolidation: efficiency in terms of power; production, acquisition, and deployment of expensive equipment; high-availability of services, operations and staff, e…

I hadn't seen Axie before, but I have seen a few other blockchain games. They seem to suffer the same pitfalls as the whole gamification trend that went around a few years ago, in that the game part feels tacked on, which of course completely misses the point. I have no doubt a good game could be built around the blockchain, as are my thoughts on gamification for fitness or whatever else, but the game has to come fir…

I don't share your optimism. Just as most smart contract/web3/crypto developers fail to understand political science, economics, physics, and software engineering; fewer seem to understand game development -- yet are happy to blithely repeat the same myth that game assets will somehow live on the block chain and be use-able in different games! Imagine owning Mario!

There are a ton of great games being made today without any of this "ownership" stuff and users are not complaining about it. It's not a pain point for anyone who plays games.

However it does present an opportunity for someone, somewhere to keep growing the herd of people at the bottom of the pyramid...

Re: Web3 is expensive P2P

#174

Post by pshc »

bogwog wrote: post #68

> The Web3 community approaches this from the opposite side: Instead of a lightweight communistic take, they follow a heavyweight libertarian path: Everything should be monetized. This is how you get people to stop reading your article, and to instantly agree or disagree with you (regardless of what you're saying) based only on the political language you used. I'm not a politician, and I make an active effort to avoi…

What I find amusing in the Twitter bubble I inhabit, people tend to talk about Ethereum blockspace and layers as a public good, a collectivized shared resource, y'know, left wing commie stuff. (Cynically, as a cover for profiteering?)

Whereas the Bitcoin's vibe seems more about scarcity and tribalism, "bitcoin is all you need" maximalism, and so on.

Re: Web3 is expensive P2P

#175

Post by the_gastropod »

chrisco255 wrote: post #142
ehutch79 wrote: post #121

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But it's not like you can use assets/data from one website in another, unless it's something like a jpg... in which case it's not like you can't just upload that jpg You'd need everyone to agree to the same standard for stuff. Definitely more likely than game assets, but still incredibly unlikely

Of course you could. Just carrying your identity (even an anon one) between applications alone can be useful. How can I follow the same people on Twitter and Reddit and Discord and Playstation Network? Currently all this is difficult, awkward, etc with the current fragmentation in the market. Meanwhile, any digital content or rights can be represented by an NFT. Is it useful to own the commercial rights to use a pop…

> Of course you could. Just carrying your identity (even an anon one) between applications alone can be useful. How can I follow the same people on Twitter and Reddit and Discord and Playstation Network? Currently all this is difficult, awkward, etc with the current fragmentation in the market.

An email address? Why do we need to complicate this with blockchain tomfoolery?

Re: Web3 is expensive P2P

#176

Post by uoaei »

empathy_m wrote: post #170

OK, so granted the boxes-and-arrows descriptions of these software systems are identical if you squint to things we built decades ago. But the social way that human reason about these systems -- that is different this time. Gentle readers, last night I dreamed I was seated in the nave of a tall cathedral, watching four bishops conduct a service at an altar. There were readings with the call-and-response ("The word of…

Having a vision in a dream about Bitcoin last night really doesn't give it any more authority today than it had yesterday.

Re: Web3 is expensive P2P

#177

Post by achenet »

APock wrote: post #77
przeor wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Quoted post unavailable.

The ponzi schemes ran by governments are ultimately run as a benefit to your retirement, and most importantly, you can overthrow a government.

you make it sound so easy...

why not just waltz into Russia, tell Putin and pals to leave and replace them with kind, competent, generous leaders?

Re: Web3 is expensive P2P

#178

Post by 5350-uiop-1130 »

lalaland1125 wrote: post #22
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? 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.

Good point

Re: Web3 is expensive P2P

#179

Post by px43 »

WanderPanda wrote: post #80
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.

Wait, Skype ain't p2p anymore?

Microsoft bought it, removed the encryption and decentralization, and started piping conversations directly to the NSA.

Re: Web3 is expensive P2P

#180

Post by [deleted] »

Karunamon wrote: post #53
kkielhofner wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

[deleted]
Post reply on HN