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

141–150 of 636 posts

Re: Web3? I have my DAOts

#141

Post by cblconfederate »

Animats wrote: post #99

OK. The reason all this happening is that Bitcoin really did go to the moon. That's what powers all this speculation. If the price of Bitcoin had been stable for a decade, and it worked reliably, it would be a useful medium of exchange, but nobody would care. This is all about MAKE MONEY FAST. Bitcoin found some early use cases. Drugs first. Then getting money out of China. Money laundering. Tax evasion. Scams. Bitco…

that's how i felt about social networking. People posting their breakfast, ridiculous. Baby pictures, silly. Cat pictures, kids these days. Yet somehow the vanity/reality show is making billions 10 years later

Re: Web3? I have my DAOts

#142

Post by zepto »

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…

You are just using a bad bank. The bank I use lets you initiate a wire via their iPhone app, and then they simply call to confirm security details etc.

Far easier and safer than anything crypto has to offer.

Not to mention that it’s a complete fantasy to expect all but the tiniest number of sellers to accept crypto today, so the comparison is between something that exists today and works very well, and something that is only imaginary.

Re: Web3? I have my DAOts

#143

Post by Uehreka »

roca wrote: post #136
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…

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.

Oh totally true, I’m not expecting them to. I just think this could be a way to pick some of the low hanging fruit: users who want easy sign-in on sites that don’t want to roll their own IDP. Right now that niche is filled with the multicolored array of “sign in with FB, Google, MS, GitHub, Steam, LinkedIn, Apple”. This would be a way to add an extra option of “sign in with ENS” that would offer the benefit of not including tracking or any association at all with a particular company.

Maybe not that many people would use it, but unlike a lot of other crypto stuff, this doesn’t require universal buy-in in order to be marginally useful to the people who do use it.

Re: Web3? I have my DAOts

#144

Post by rvz »

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…

> And ENS works now, it’s the kind of thing you could just go ahead and add to a web app you’re working on without having to wait for “the tech to arrive” or anything.

What they don't tell you is that every single operation for every dApp on Ethereum, the gas fess make using this totally useless, which mean you have no choice but to tell others to wait for 'the gas fees to go down'. Rendering it useless.

Everyone knows that every operation is so expensive, that you cannot use Ethereum to pay for your groceries; making it totally useless in general since everyone needs to eat. Not even the other L2, ZK contraptions are ready or are even optimised enough to be useful so that isn't an option despite the hype around it.

Seems more like a centralised domain registrar contract having a sub-domain on .eth (collides with Ethiopia's three letter TLD) on an expensive blockchain controlled by so-called 'trusted' key-holders.

Re: Web3? I have my DAOts

#145

Post by cblconfederate »

roca wrote: post #136
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…

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.

persona was good, but was abandoned prematurely, probably for the reasons you mention

I can log in somewhere with metamask however without involving google. It's orthogonal , and that s why it can succeed

Re: Web3? I have my DAOts

#146

Post by UncleMeat »

serverholic wrote: post #91
UncleMeat wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't see how this is beneficial compared to signature-based auth. Didn't people all recoil in horror at the real-names policy that Google performed ages ago? Making it fundamentally difficult to separate my identity on various platforms is bad. And further, I really don't see the benefit of having my username stored on a blockchain rather than in an application database. Is the goal to prevent other people from ma…

Who said you need to use your real name?

The overlap here is the centralization of identity, not the actual real name part. Is it desirable to have my hn handle also match my wow character name?

Re: Web3? I have my DAOts

#147

Post by wyager »

Animats wrote: post #99

OK. The reason all this happening is that Bitcoin really did go to the moon. That's what powers all this speculation. If the price of Bitcoin had been stable for a decade, and it worked reliably, it would be a useful medium of exchange, but nobody would care. This is all about MAKE MONEY FAST. Bitcoin found some early use cases. Drugs first. Then getting money out of China. Money laundering. Tax evasion. Scams. Bitco…

> If the price of Bitcoin had been stable for a decade, and it worked reliably, it would be a useful medium of exchange, but nobody would care. This is all about MAKE MONEY FAST.

Your counterfactual is nonsense. There is no world where Bitcoin remains stable for a decade. It's precisely the nature of Bitcoin that it either eats a large fraction of global monetary value or ends up close to zero. Bitcoin's existence provides the purest possible application of Gresham's law. The price of Bitcoin reflects the imputed probability of bitcoin eating monetary value, as well as the fraction it ends up eating.

> all this stuff is zero-sum

Bitcoin is positive-sum if you believe in the benefits of sound money, but yes, people who are net dollar bagholders (e.g. US govt and people with US govt debt) will lose wealth if Bitcoin successfully demonetizes the dollar. It would probably be wise to hedge against this scenario by balancing long dollar positions with long Bitcoin positions.

Re: Web3? I have my DAOts

#148

Post by dane-pgp »

vvpan wrote: post #120
vagabund wrote: post #105

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 re…

Arguments about blockchain here on HN are frustrating. There are plenty of good examples of where it works very well but the mental gymnastic people go through to deny the obvious are incredible. The most basic to me is the Automatic Market Maker system. For example Uniswap is a system with only a few (relatively speaking) lines of a code at its core and a team of a couple of dozen. The system does billions of dollar…

> Mining HNT with Hotspots is done via radio technology, not expensive or wasteful GPUs.

> Hotspots work together to form a new global wireless network and undertake ‘Proof-of-Coverage’.

Okay that's actually quite clever. I've previously wondered why no one has tried a similar idea for wired networks, implementing "Proof of possession of IPv4 address". It may be possible for a nation state to take control of a large IP range for some short period of time, but I don't think it's plausible that even conspiring adversaries could control 51% of the internet for a week without anyone noticing.

Re: Web3? I have my DAOts

#149

Post by fnoof »

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…

I suspect that blockchains won’t need to reference external data to be useful.

If the data on chain becomes valuable enough, an ecosystem of open source, auditable programs operating on it seems powerful to me.

And yeah tx fees are facemeltingly expensive right now, but scalability tech is making gradual progress.

Post reply on HN