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

Introducing Token

blog.tokenbrowser.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 157 posts

Re: Introducing Token

#111

Post by pipermerriam »

m3ta wrote: post #98
STRML wrote: post #87

I like the idea, but this is very confusing to end-consumers: - Is this just a messaging app? A payments app? A web browser? - It's all of those things, except not a web browser, it's an "app browser" (why not app store, especially considering the whole point of these is that they are paid?) - The starting experience is anything but compelling: http://i.imgur.com/U69Gskl.png - Is this developed by Coinbase? If so, wh…

The more confusing thing is what will happen when the userbase finds out Ethereum "smart contracts" aren't good for anything except online gambling which certainly will not be allowed on the TokenBrowser app. Also, I shook my head when I saw your screenshot, that is certainly not a good first impression.

Isn't the history of technology riddled with inventions that "aren't good for anything except ..." which turned out to be good for lots of things.

From the top of my head the following examples come to mind.

1. Early criticism of the tablet was that nobody would use them because they didn't have a keyboard.

2. Early criticism of the internet was that nobody would ever purchase anything over the internet.

3. Early criticism of dropbox mentioned elsewhere in this thread, "they're just re-selling S3, why would anyone use that".

Disclaimer that I'm pretty deep in the Ethereum space so my perspective is anything but objective, but it is informed as I know the space quite well.

Smart contracts are capable of big transformative change to how we do a lot of things, but they are REALLY new and we're only just starting to learn how to use them and what we can use them for. Here are some examples.

1. Look at [ENS](http://ens.domains/) as an example of what DNS might look like if it weren't centralized.

2. Look at [simple Escrow examples](https://dappsforbeginners.wordpress.com/tutorials/two-party-...) for how smart contracts can remove middlemen from financial transactions.

None of these things are likely to blow up into massive mainstream adoption tomorrow but they are illustrative of what is possible and there are a lot of people working very hard to make these things ready for mainstream adoption.

Re: Introducing Token

#112

Post by pimlottc »

paulddraper wrote: post #94
omginternets wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hmm, I'm going swim against the current and say I like the fact that it's called a browser. I like this because it is a browser, albeit not a web browser. I think this is exactly what's missing from blockchain-derived technologies: a simple human interface to remote resources. More to the point, calling this thing a browser anchors it firmly into a well-known context. This should be useful for explaining it to our pa…

Agreed. I'm looking at the Apache LDAP browser right now. Not a spec of HTML anywhere.

"Apache Directory Studio™: The Eclipse-based LDAP browser and directory client"

Sounds like that is a tool meant for technical users, e.g. IT staff, though, not general users.

Re: Introducing Token

#113

Post by pimlottc »

omginternets wrote: post #74
pimlottc wrote: post #35

I'm not sure "Browser" is a good term for this; I get that they are trying to convey that it's just a client for the existing independent Etherium network, but to 99% of people, "browser" == "web browser". It's just going to cause confusion, especially in non-technical users (which seems to be a user base they are trying to go for here). Even as a developer, when I saw "tokenbrowser.com", I was expecting to see a web…

Hmm, I'm going swim against the current and say I like the fact that it's called a browser. I like this because it is a browser, albeit not a web browser. I think this is exactly what's missing from blockchain-derived technologies: a simple human interface to remote resources. More to the point, calling this thing a browser anchors it firmly into a well-known context. This should be useful for explaining it to our pa…

> More to the point, calling this thing a browser anchors it firmly into a well-known context. This should be useful for explaining it to our parents.

I think if I told my mom this was a browser, she would be confused to see something that looks more like her text message than a web page.

Re: Introducing Token

#114

Post by pipermerriam »

camjohnson26 wrote: post #69

What can you actually do with this, other than chat and send payments? There's only 2 apps in the recommended section and they're both basic.

This is an early release of something intended to be a platform on which independent developers can build applications. Everything on there is meant to be illustrative of what you can do. Currently it only operates on the test network so it's a toy for the time being.

Re: Introducing Token

#116

Post by pimlottc »

nostrademons wrote: post #93
pre wrote: post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Has it though? Does nobody else use a file-browser any more? I'm mostly command-line but even I use a file-browser fairly often.

Most people I know never called that a file-browser in the first place. It was just "my files", as if the files were things in their own right that just appeared on screen. OS vendors have played into that, with icon labels that say "My Documents" or "All my files". It's to their advantage to not let anyone know that there's a separate program that sits on top of the filesystem to show the contents of the filesystem.…

I agree. It is always important to remember that to most "normal people" this stuff - the Internet, the web, their smartphone apps - are a huge clumpy ball of undifferentiated "magic". And that's not because they're stupid people, but because this stuff really is quite complicated and most people already have plenty of other things to worry about.

Re: Introducing Token

#117

Post by infodroid »

pimlottc wrote: post #35

I'm not sure "Browser" is a good term for this; I get that they are trying to convey that it's just a client for the existing independent Etherium network, but to 99% of people, "browser" == "web browser". It's just going to cause confusion, especially in non-technical users (which seems to be a user base they are trying to go for here). Even as a developer, when I saw "tokenbrowser.com", I was expecting to see a web…

Yesterday there was a discussion [1] about a similar app named Status, which calls itself a "Mobile Ethereum OS" [2]. And between "browser" and "OS", I'm not even sure which is the worse way to describe this type of app.

Perhaps a more constructive question would be: what is the best way to describe such apps?

[1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14161695 [2] https://wiki.status.im

Re: Introducing Token

#118

Post by smacktoward »

nostrademons wrote: post #93
pre wrote: post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Has it though? Does nobody else use a file-browser any more? I'm mostly command-line but even I use a file-browser fairly often.

Most people I know never called that a file-browser in the first place. It was just "my files", as if the files were things in their own right that just appeared on screen. OS vendors have played into that, with icon labels that say "My Documents" or "All my files". It's to their advantage to not let anyone know that there's a separate program that sits on top of the filesystem to show the contents of the filesystem.…

Yeah, the idea of a "file browser" as an application separate from the OS is just not something most people have ever gotten. The file browser is just "Windows" or whatever, just part of the OS.

(You can install file browsers other than the default one on most OSes, true. But how many people actually do that? Even fewer than install Web browsers.)

Re: Introducing Token

#119

Post by omginternets »

pimlottc wrote: post #113
omginternets wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hmm, I'm going swim against the current and say I like the fact that it's called a browser. I like this because it is a browser, albeit not a web browser. I think this is exactly what's missing from blockchain-derived technologies: a simple human interface to remote resources. More to the point, calling this thing a browser anchors it firmly into a well-known context. This should be useful for explaining it to our pa…

> More to the point, calling this thing a browser anchors it firmly into a well-known context. This should be useful for explaining it to our parents. I think if I told my mom this was a browser, she would be confused to see something that looks more like her text message than a web page.

I'm going to gently accuse you of intellectual dishonesty, here ;)

In the phrasing you chose, you imply that it's a web browser -- this is the source of the hypothetical confusion.

Now try this: "Mom, this is a lot like a web browser (i.e. firefox, chrome, etc) but it's not for web pages. It's for a different kind of content".

Surely you'll admit this a helpful description...

Re: Introducing Token

#120

Post by omginternets »

pimlottc wrote: post #112
paulddraper wrote: post #94

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Agreed. I'm looking at the Apache LDAP browser right now. Not a spec of HTML anywhere.

"Apache Directory Studio™: The Eclipse-based LDAP browser and directory client" Sounds like that is a tool meant for technical users, e.g. IT staff, though, not general users.

I think the point still stands: calling something a browser implies that it's used for browsing. Most people will immediately think of a web browser, but it's still useful to frame things as "a browser, but not for the web. For something else".
Post reply on HN