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

131–140 of 636 posts

Re: Web3? I have my DAOts

#131

Post by shagie »

showerst wrote: post #96
brandonmenc wrote: post #86

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I also would way rather make large purchases with crypto (e.g. down payment on a house) For a purchase that large, I would rather make it in person. With a check. Which is way more secure than crypto or a wire transfer.

Not trying to be facetious — who lets you make a down payment with a check? I’ve worked with title companies (though only in 2 US states) and never seen a closing that wasn’t wire based.

All the transactions for my previous house (buying and selling) were done by passing pieces of paper between persons.

Bad checks have other ways of being dealt with through legal means. There's no reason to doubt the check held (and handed over) isn't good.

Re: Web3? I have my DAOts

#132

Post by Uehreka »

Acrobatic_Road wrote: post #75
Uehreka wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I said this in another comment on this post, but check out ENS. I’ve been a blockchain skeptic for a long time (and still am about art NFTs and most other things) but the idea of “SSO without a company attached” feels like something the mainstream public actually does want (think of all the negative public sentiment around big tech companies harvesting data and the grudging acceptance people have of their dependence…

Wait until you learn that ENS domains are NFTS.

Which is why I now specify “art NFTs” ;-)

Re: Web3? I have my DAOts

#133

Post by twic »

almostkorean wrote: post #106
zepto wrote: post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 co…

People are probably tired of hearing this, but this is not a problem with wiring, it's a problem with US banks.

When i bought my home in the UK six years ago, i phoned my bank, told them how much i wanted to send and to who, and they did it, with the money arriving straight away. If the amount had been less than 20k, i could have done it online rather than over the phone; the back-end payment machinery is the same, but i suppose the bank think there's less chance of a normal customer making a mistake with a large transfer if someone walks them through it. My bank is rather old-fashioned; more modern banks let you make large transfers online or through their app:

https://www.starlingbank.com/blog/high-value-payments/

That page mentions that "one of our team members may need to double check a few details before the payment can be made" - again, that's nothing to do with the machinery, that's in case you match some pattern looking for fraud or money laundering etc.

Re: Web3? I have my DAOts

#134

Post by twic »

Uehreka wrote: post #33
whoisjuan wrote: post #25

I think the problem with the current state of Web3 is that it really doesn't seem to solve meaningful, mainstream problems yet. Even the most widely accepted use case which is crypto-currency fails to break out of the theoretical value outlined in the different white papers. I own several crypto-currencies and there hasn't been a single moment in which I thought of buying something with a crypto-currency. I have cryp…

I said this in another comment on this post, but check out ENS. I’ve been a blockchain skeptic for a long time (and still am about art NFTs and most other things) but the idea of “SSO without a company attached” feels like something the mainstream public actually does want (think of all the negative public sentiment around big tech companies harvesting data and the grudging acceptance people have of their dependence…

Client certificates have been a thing for years. They haven't caught on because the user experience is so terrible. ENS seems like client certificates with extra steps.

But, it is definitely a real use-case, so hats off to people for having a go at it!

Re: Web3? I have my DAOts

#135

Post by throw_nbvc1234 »

daoismyname wrote: post #73
chrisco255 wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you create a "web3" website, it's up to you how decentralized you want that experience to be. You could have your content hosted on Filecoin, perform computation on ICP or Arweave, provide IPFS hashes to your users using open standards (HTML, JSON, Markdown, etc) with simple export functionality, open source code, ENS domain, etc. If you take payments on your site via crypto, I'm not sure what you mean by "not acc…

Quoted post unavailable.

> If you create a "web3" website, it's up to you how decentralized you want that experience to be

> and this is new, how?

It's not about decentralization, it's about decentralized trust. Why would you give someone's random website (or random gofundme) $1k? Maybe that decision would change if there was a smart contract which forced them to spend the money how you expected.

Re: Web3? I have my DAOts

#136

Post by roca »

Uehreka wrote: post #33
whoisjuan wrote: post #25

I think the problem with the current state of Web3 is that it really doesn't seem to solve meaningful, mainstream problems yet. Even the most widely accepted use case which is crypto-currency fails to break out of the theoretical value outlined in the different white papers. I own several crypto-currencies and there hasn't been a single moment in which I thought of buying something with a crypto-currency. I have cryp…

I said this in another comment on this post, but check out ENS. I’ve been a blockchain skeptic for a long time (and still am about art NFTs and most other things) but the idea of “SSO without a company attached” feels like something the mainstream public actually does want (think of all the negative public sentiment around big tech companies harvesting data and the grudging acceptance people have of their dependence…

Mozilla's Persona project solved federated ID for the Web pretty well, a decade ago. The problem is that a lot of the big tech companies want to completely own their relationships with their users. Google is never going to let you log in with something other than a Google ID, etc. There is no technical way to solve this problem.

Re: Web3? I have my DAOts

#137

Post by PragmaticPulp »

twic wrote: post #133
almostkorean wrote: post #106

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 co…

People are probably tired of hearing this, but this is not a problem with wiring, it's a problem with US banks. When i bought my home in the UK six years ago, i phoned my bank, told them how much i wanted to send and to who, and they did it, with the money arriving straight away. If the amount had been less than 20k, i could have done it online rather than over the phone; the back-end payment machinery is the same, b…

> People are probably tired of hearing this, but this is not a problem with wiring, it's a problem with US banks.

I have a US bank and I can send wires online. It's really not uncommon. I don't understand how or why the OP is banking with an outdated bank an hour away from his house when there are good options that can be accessed entirely online.

There are a lot of behind-the-times banks in the US, though. If you're stuck in one, considering switching.

Re: Web3? I have my DAOts

#138

Post by Uehreka »

pavlov wrote: post #46
Uehreka wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I said this in another comment on this post, but check out ENS. I’ve been a blockchain skeptic for a long time (and still am about art NFTs and most other things) but the idea of “SSO without a company attached” feels like something the mainstream public actually does want (think of all the negative public sentiment around big tech companies harvesting data and the grudging acceptance people have of their dependence…

The mainstream public doesn't want their identity attached to a private key that they can lose. And if you're letting someone else store the key, then it's just another form of "Login with X".

Well if you think this is bad, wait until you hear about MFA ;-)

On the real, I think there are people who will want to try this if it’s made easy enough. Some people could try getting a name and keeping a wallet through a 3rd party, in which case they’re no better or worse off than they are now. But at any moment, if they feel the need, they could transfer that username to a cold wallet if they want to take control of their security. Or transfer it back to the third party if they later decide that’s too much work.

The cool thing about this is that it’s another option out there and it offers flexibility. For the record, again, I’m not one of those people calling this a revolution or “the biggest thing since the invention of the web”. I just think this one idea is kind of neat.

Re: Web3? I have my DAOts

#139

Post by PragmaticPulp »

almostkorean wrote: post #106
zepto wrote: post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 co…

> 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.

You really need to switch to a modern bank that doesn't force you to go in person to do a wire. That's insanity.

Fidelity has free wire transfers, no need to go into a bank: https://www.fidelity.com/customer-service/choose-eft-or-bank...

Re: Web3? I have my DAOts

#140

Post by twic »

api wrote: post #13
serverholic wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Sign-In with Ethereum" will be huge. I purposefully avoid "Sign-in with Google" because putting too much power in a centralized authority terrifies me. I'd much rather have the convenience of "Sign-In with X" but backed by something I have control over.

IMHO this could be the "killer app" and is something I might actually use if it got sufficient traction and support. OpenID gives a few organizations like Google, Okta, and Microsoft "root on the entire world." It terrifies me.

There's no technical reason it has to be a few organisations. Anyone can set up a provider. The only OpenID i use regularly is from Stack Exchange:

https://openid.stackexchange.com/

HN could be a provider! You could be news.ycombinator.com/api, which admittedly would be a very confusing name to the casual observer.

The reason it all ended up being centralised is that almost nobody really valued it being decentralised.

Post reply on HN