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

Web3? I have my DAOts

networked.substack.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 636 posts

Re: Web3? I have my DAOts

#101

Post by jonny_eh »

p2p_astroturf wrote: post #81
dperfect wrote: post #78

I completely agree with the author. I've been reading a lot about the EVM, and while there's some interesting technology involved, it feels unlikely to be able to support any worthwhile applications outside of blockchain finance or moving $ around the world[0] (since the code can really only directly reference the blockchain itself). It's a bit like playing with a programming language in a sandbox that has (1) has no…

tell us something we didnt already know. you can solve the speed problem by using solana or literally any of the other 100 coins that claim to be fast, or eth2 in six months i am not even a person who is a fan of blockchains (since they are mostly poorly designed, unfounded, etc)

> you can solve the speed problem by using solana or literally any of the other 100 coins that claim to be fast, or eth2 in six months

I've been seeing this claim for years now. It's gotten quite old.

Re: Web3? I have my DAOts

#102

Post by [deleted] »

adamrezich wrote: post #34
api wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> An interesting possibility is that illegal content gets permanently inserted into a blockchain, which could make running, for example, an ethereum node very illegal. I've heard this called a "pee in the pool attack." Block chains like Ethereum and Bitcoin have one intrinsic defense: they don't support very large data objects. So that makes inserting CP problematic. But someone determined enough and willing to spend…

has there been a documented case of this happening yet? one would think that there must have been, at some point, by now. but then I suppose if someone were to make a program that accesses intentionally-inserted distributed immutable data in a blockchain and reconstructs an illegal file (probably an image), then I suppose that executable or source repository itself would then be taken down by authorities and its auth…

[deleted]

Re: Web3? I have my DAOts

#104

Post by throw_nbvc1234 »

2muchcoffeeman wrote: post #100
PretzelPirate wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The person you replied to said “crypto” not “Bitcoin”. They can convert their coins to an algorithmic stablecoin and make the payment in a single transaction with no price change.

So is Bitcoin no longer being pushed as a currency? Is that “official”?

Who are you looking to "officially" decide that? Best you can probably do is look at what hard forks have occurred (such as bitcoin vs bitcash in this case) to see community splits.

Re: Web3? I have my DAOts

#105

Post by vagabund »

It's disingenuous for the author to present instances where some level of trusted actors is required in the near-term to make a service operational as voiding any claim of decentralization; obviously, the centralization of a network exists on a spectrum and where it's present in Web3 tech it's almost invariably more limited in scope than the centralization of their Web2.0 counterparts. Likewise his claim that APIs represent the same sort of composability as intrinsically public smart contracts belies the extent to which companies limit the usage of their APIs, assuming they give access at all. And that true composability of Web3.0 should temper concerns about centralization: if ever powerful figures in a project breach some threshold of control tolerated by the community, the project can trivially be forked and their positions removed. Where trustlessness can't be hardcoded into the system it can be achieved through the alignment of incentives, and the result is services that are more beholden to their users than any that have come before them.

As for real-world applications of this technology that couldn't be achieved prior, I'd point to Helium [1].

[1] https://www.helium.com/

Re: Web3? I have my DAOts

#106

Post by almostkorean »

zepto wrote: post #72
iskander wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>I own several crypto-currencies and there hasn't been a single moment in which I thought of buying something with a crypto-currency. This is entirely personal and subjective, but I prefer the user experience of Aave and Yearn to traditional banking with e.g. Chase. I also would way rather make large purchases with crypto (e.g. down payment on a house) compared with wiring money.

Why is ‘ wiring ’ so bad from your point of view?

I'm not OP but I had to wire money earlier this year when I bought a house. To accomplish this, I had to drive to my nearest bank branch (1 hour drive), talk to a bank teller for 15 minutes while she filled out forms and printed out papers I had to sign, and then they told me the wire would probably arrive in time for the house signing (3 hours later). This was to send ~$15k. Compare this to sending USDC on [smart contract enabled blockchain] which takes a few clicks and minutes at most.

For arguments sake I will point out the downsides to using crypto in this case:

1. Most people don't want to manage their own wallet

2. USDC is centralized so there is some amount of risk

3. If you send it to the wrong wallet, RIP to your money

FWIW, I was just as scared of sending the wire transfer to the wrong place as I was when I send crypto. And with crypto you can quickly send a small test amount first. You can use something like DAI which is less centralized than USDC if that risk is a concern. Wallet UX will improve over time

Re: Web3? I have my DAOts

#107

Post by dustintrex »

etaioinshrdlu wrote: post #12
TrackerFF wrote: post #8

RE: Censorship You often see advocates of decentralization hail networks for being pro-immutability, battling censorship. How does it deal with data you absolutely do _NOT_ want to be shared and propagated around? I'm talking about things like CP, terrorist media, fake news, scams/frauds, and what not.

Crypto proponents are in favor of there being no technical restrictions that prevent such content being posted. An interesting possibility is that illegal content gets permanently inserted into a blockchain, which could make running, for example, an ethereum node very illegal.

This has already happened. Nobody seems to care.

https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2018/mar/20/child-abu...

Re: Web3? I have my DAOts

#109

Post by gfodor »

daoismyname wrote: post #85
gfodor wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Even if nothing else pops out, it’s a huge error to point to illegal activity as some kind of bad, irrelevant use case. That smuggles in an assumption that lawbreakers are universally evil. There have been plenty of periods in history where those enforcing the law in a given country were the oppressors, and the resistant lawbreakers the innocent. It’s worth considering what the value proposition of crypto looks like…

> It’s worth considering what the value proposition of crypto looks like if you were to find yourself living under an illegitimate authority The cables where communications pass through are protected by armies If crypto eventually could pose a threat to those illegitimate authorities, they would give orders to cut the cables and games would be over. they could also trace them back to your house.

I wrote:

> It may be marginal if the authority can stop it

Because often the response to claims like the one I made is to just hand wave it away as some kind of Armageddon situation. But it doesn't have to be. The USSR and the modern day CCP operate in an environment where certain levels of criminality are virtuous, but things are not so draconian or suppressive as the environment you state.

Re: Web3? I have my DAOts

#110

Post by gfodor »

Daishiman wrote: post #83
gfodor wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Even if nothing else pops out, it’s a huge error to point to illegal activity as some kind of bad, irrelevant use case. That smuggles in an assumption that lawbreakers are universally evil. There have been plenty of periods in history where those enforcing the law in a given country were the oppressors, and the resistant lawbreakers the innocent. It’s worth considering what the value proposition of crypto looks like…

Yes, but you generally can't build a business on top of an illegal industry that's closely scrutinized by law enforcement. Already law enforcement agencies are campaigning hard against ransomware, and central banks and tax agencies investigating how people are using cryptocurrencies to launder money. It doesn't mean it doesn't have value; it's just that the real expected value can't be expected to have legitimate bus…

Certainly. But if one is going to argue about the value proposition of Web3, it may not be insane to postulate that in the future a large % of the world will live under regimes where the ability to interact with others illegally will be a strong value prop. (Not just financially, but in terms of speech, etc.)
Post reply on HN