[deleted]
Web3 is a stupid idea
151–160 of 220 posts
Re: Web3 is a stupid idea
#152Sadly not sure the ecosystem is mature enough for any kind of standardization yet.
Both Über and react are nearing eol.
Re: Web3 is a stupid idea
#153Earlier quoted context omitted.
Celebrities, politicians, and executives and the farthest thing from a power user as is possible in this universe. Did you mean people with a lot at stake in regards to their public image?
Power users in terms of social media
These people rarely, if ever, manage their own profiles.
Not sure how something like Web3 would help their use case.
Thoughts?
Re: Web3 is a stupid idea
#154Earlier quoted context omitted.
Why would these types of people want all their data available on a public chain?
They want their public data public, but owned. It won’t be ‘on chain’ it will be off chain but the ownership token will be ‘on chain’. As an example, they may have their public photos in IPFS, served from their server (or shared pointers), but will have ownership rights of those photos on chain. That is different than Instagram where Facebook owns the images. They cannot be deplatformed which is valuable. The questio…
Celebrities wouldn't care who owns the photos, all that matters is whether exposure leads to jobs.
The photos are valuable only to the photographer, who has the right to license it to Getty and others.
Re: Web3 is a stupid idea
#155Earlier quoted context omitted.
Can you tell me an example of what simply didn't exist five years ago and now exists bc of Web3? And the potential of the tech? Because i used to work in an agency and we develop apps and smart contracts for Ethereum and what they were doing were the most basic and primitive things, slow, fragile, incapable and very expensive to use. Not to mention all the environmental problems with PoW. Only reason we were developi…
Just today I paid for access to a data tool, icy.tools. I simply connected my Metamask wallet, clicked on “Unlock premium”, confirmed the transaction, and it was done. Normally, I’d have to make an account (and doge the obligatory “sign up with Google” button), fill a form, enter my credit card info, confirm my otp on the payment site, check my email for an authentication link before using the product. Along the way,…
Is this substantially different from a website with a PayPal button? That's 2-3 clicks, max.
The only difference seems to be that with PP I pay with real money, and Web3 is with cryptocurrencies only.
Re: Web3 is a stupid idea
#156It's much easier to criticize than to build an alternative. I don't think anyone at Metamask or in the space in general thinks to themselves that the ecosystem is in a state of full maturity or that there aren't major problems. Despite its shortcomings, MM and Web3 have given us capabilities that simply didn't exist five years ago. And those capabilities aren't just limited to a select number of shadowy super hackers…
The criticism of this ecosystem is just absolutely short sighted. When I first got internet, it was 56 kbps, a single page took minutes to load, and it was so expensive that I couldn’t stay online for more than 30 minutes per day. It took 5 years for my town to get “broadband” at 256kbps, and another 5 years to get 2mbps. Maybe I should have given up on the internet back in 1996 to…
I first had home Internet in 1997, and even then its value was immediately obvious.- Email
- Chatrooms
- Maps and directions
- Newspapers from around the world, free (even WSJ didn't put up a paywall until 2005).
- IT troubleshooting information that didn't require calling the surly clowns at your local computer shop.
Does Web3 have something like that that makes it a must-have?
Re: Web3 is a stupid idea
#157I was around for web 2.0, and it felt like a substantial change over how the web worked previously. It was the first glimpse that the web was capable of replacing the desktop apps we were accustomed to, while simultaneously adding new capabilities that didn't exist in desktop apps. There was a lot more to it, but to the casual user that was the most obvious difference. This was the first thing I've read about web 3,…
metamask has 10MM monthly active users, opensea at half the volume of ebay last month... anecdotally, people seem to be moving to wallet connect smartphone wallets (eg rainbow) recently as they are nicer than browser extensions + you can use mobile websites/apps with them. Metamask is a bit of a mess tbh. I've been in the space for a few years now so i find it really hard imagining a non-cryptocurrency/web3 internet…
What physical products, if any have you purchased with crypto?
I'm not doubting your touting of Web3, it's just....your description just sounds like you found a community of like minded people online. Those things have come and gone on the clear web many times. It's not something that's unique to Web 3.
Re: Web3 is a stupid idea
#158Earlier quoted context omitted.
I’m so glad the entire decentralized community has rallied around the limitless power and innovation of NFTs.
Please make an NFT of your comment for sale on opensea... I suggest "Bored hackernews comment club"
Christie's and Sotheby's will be on red alert when this drops.
Re: Web3 is a stupid idea
#159Earlier quoted context omitted.
Just today I paid for access to a data tool, icy.tools. I simply connected my Metamask wallet, clicked on “Unlock premium”, confirmed the transaction, and it was done. Normally, I’d have to make an account (and doge the obligatory “sign up with Google” button), fill a form, enter my credit card info, confirm my otp on the payment site, check my email for an authentication link before using the product. Along the way,…
Is this substantially different from a website with a PayPal button? That's 2-3 clicks, max. The only difference seems to be that with PP I pay with real money, and Web3 is with cryptocurrencies only.
What if I don't want to share my email, phone number, bank account, and credit card data with PayPal?
Its really disturbing to me that privacy and data rights get absolutely zero consideration even on HN.
Re: Web3 is a stupid idea
#160Earlier quoted context omitted.
The difference here though is that web 3 really is just 'technical details' to most people. PC's had potential, they were getting cheaper, faster, and more software was being written for them every day. People could play video games, and show off to their friends. Web 3 has none of that, it's all just technical details that 90% of the population doesn't care about one bit.
Web3 is money! The web2.0 it is impossible to make transactions between people, sites, and others. It's easier to put an ad than to ask the visitor for money. Imagine the possibility of creating feedback with automatic micro-payments!
This will fail for the same reason other attempts at stimulating micropayments has.
People are used to accessing text and video on the web for free. You and I may have a paid subscription to a Patreon or newspaper, but in both cases we are not paying piecemeal.