Live data from Hacker News

An engineer's observations on Web3 and its possibilities

psl.com

151–160 of 319 posts

Re: An engineer's observations on Web3 and its possibilities

#151

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I mean 24-7 comes for free. Security comes in some way for free as well. Large amount: its relative, so even for 10k USD you would pay 100 USD as fee. You get similar fees for purchasing stocks and many have more then 100k in equity. So it isn't really a small niche. Rather a huge market that may get more simple and cheap through DeFi.

The major brokerages have let you buy and sell stocks for free for a couple years now. (Not just Robinhood, though they started it.)

Ok maybe in the us. Anyway are you sure it is really free in regards that they don't give you a worse price or won't execute if things move in the wrong direction like Robinhood did...? My point is, its just inconvenient for me to rely on a third party without able to enter the "true" market on myself.

Re: An engineer's observations on Web3 and its possibilities

#152
post #102

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Solana and affiliated organizations probably owns 999 validators, that is my guess

Solana and... EOS and... XRP...

But people seem not care that much about decentralization, as long as they could trade tokens.

Re: An engineer's observations on Web3 and its possibilities

#153
post #106

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Lack of human support in the old Web 2.0 is bad, but going full zero-trust in response seems more like throwing a fit instead of improving things (e.g., banning the exploitative ‘free’ ad-supported business models). A world in which you lose some magic alphanumeric combination (or a thief pinches your hardware key, etc.) and you are literally locked out of your identity (together with access to your eternal blockchai…

It does not even require hacker, a thief could show up at your house and demand your keys.

Ah, the ol' "rubber hose cryptanalysis". I was literally just talking about this an hour ago.

Re: An engineer's observations on Web3 and its possibilities

#154
post #138
post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Being able to query arbitrary past blockchain history is kind of gross, because you can neither partition nor elide any of the data under consensus- your verifiers need to have a copy of everything. Leads to expensive nodes cause disk space and RAM use explodes. Not an uncommon complaint about immutable programming techniques generally. Idk, kinda seems like a bad tradeoff to me. But then again if you're building it…

> verifiers need to have a copy of everything. Hate to break it to you, but if your consensus rules permit forks, then there's no getting around this. A fork can be mined arbitrarily far in the future that builds off of a block arbitrarily far in the past. We intend to partition state by application, for applications that are willing to trade smart contract composibility for more block space: https://gist.github.com/…

well basically you have to throw out proof of work and then it's fine. If that's a philosophical thing then you're constrained to highly inefficient systems that yeah, are designed to fork like you say. But if you're okay with any kind of proof of stake setup, you don't have to consider forks, because you trust your validators.

Ultimately it comes down to what you like about the blockchain chimera. Some people like proof of work for its own sake; they think that's the way forward. Some of us think that public distributed append-only log structures with cryptographically enforced permissioning are super interesting all by themselves, maybe even MORE interesting without proof of work!

Long term I don't think it's going to be any fun until a larger subset of homomorphic computing is cheap enough to run distributed-consensus style. In the meantime all I know is it's a lot more fun once you stop trying to be the source of truth for the universe, and accept proof of stake as a natural compromise necessary to keep playing with our toys w/o burning up.

I'd be happy to share but you'll have to message me. And I'm an idiot.

Re: An engineer's observations on Web3 and its possibilities

#155

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Here is a great article to read on why layer1 blockchain scalability isn’t sustainable long-term (for any layer 1): https://polynya.medium.com/why-rollups-data-shards-are-the-o... When reading about competing blockchains, it’s important to figure out if someone you’re reading values money or decentralization (and therefore individual’s digital autonomy once we enter the Metaverse). Polynya (Liberosist on Reddit) is i…

Thanks for sharing that article and for the insight, I appreciate it! I'm trying to learn the pros and cons of a lot of chains and agree that a lot of articles come across as marketing focused, so it's been hard for me to learn about each chain other than being a user and working with each chain creating simple dapps or other projects.

I’d suggest looking at the block explorer for any chain to first understand how many validators they have (there are some hot new chains with fewer than 200 validators which may be run by far fewer than 200 people). I’d also take a look at what’s actually being processed - some blockchains have their validators submit regular transactions to vote for the next block, and they can account for 90+% of the TPS the chain claims to have.

I’d then look at how their consensus model behaves - if it’s Delegated Proof of Stake, how are they handling voter apathy where users have very little incentive to change who they delegate to even if the validator they delegate to is misbehaving? What happens to misbehaving validator? Is there some mechanism in the protocol that punishes a validator for doing the wrong thing (aka slashing)?

I’d then dig into how they are any different from the thousands of existing blockchains. Did they centralize by having a few powerful machines run the chain, did they fork the Ethereum Geth code and simply increase the max gas per block to reduce fees and get a higher TPS? Making short-term decisions like that look great in the short term, but will fail over the long run due to state bloat and centralizing forces (large storage, compute, and/or networking requirements).

I’d also recommend reading articles on https://vitalik.ca/ and https://ethresear.ch/. Before you say “won’t those be bias towards Ethereum?” The answer is, sort of… Vitalik writes a lot about technical challenges in the blockchain space and how Ethereum is planning to handle them, but he seems to remain somewhat levelheaded and focuses on how the solutions help retain censorship resistance and security. EthResearch is actually used by people in the Ethereum and non-Ethereum blockchain space since many chains need to solve the same problems and are building on the work of Ethereum researchers. They are pretty open for non-Ethereum discussions there.

I would almost certainly say to avoid the cryptocurrency subreddit (that’s where people go to con others into buying their coins and farm Moons) as well as Twitter - with the exception of epolynya. I recommend reading epolynya‘s tweets because they engage with people who are championing non-Ethereum chains and start technical discussions with them which tend to be very educational. That can get you exposed to how developers on other chains view solutions to technical and economic problems.

It’s a ton of work to keep up to date on the inner workings of all these chains. Reading about the blockchain trilemma and understanding it is a good way to start get a lense to view these blockchain projects through so you can at least tell when a claim smells funny.

Re: An engineer's observations on Web3 and its possibilities

#156

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sure, but that’s replaced with user’s being in control of their identity (permanently). Lose your keys, you’re out of luck and locked out of who knows how many applications permanently. It might be fine for us, but just think of the less technically inclined folks in your life. Are they going to remember a 32 word phrase or use a password manager for a key? And what happens if they’re hacked? If google detects your a…

Then they can still use a middleman. The idea is that any data ownership can be transferred. No middleman monopoly or lock-in.

If people need a middleman, there will be a few winners and the monopoly or duopoly will continue.

Re: An engineer's observations on Web3 and its possibilities

#157
The way I see it is the idea of "ownership" creates a way to produce scarcity from story telling. If you have a good story to tell about why people should "own" your "goods" you can make a fortune. I think it's very interesting in economy / sociology / psychology sense, and an amazing opportunity for cash grab. But I won't call it a progress on web to call it "web3" because it does nothing on connecting people together like web 1.0 and web 2.0

Re: An engineer's observations on Web3 and its possibilities

#158
post #17
post #6

Hi all — I wrote these notes with my colleagues at PSL while trying to wrap our heads around the madness that is Web3/Crypto. I’m an engineer by background and sort of a skeptic by nature; I think of this piece as a collection of loosely connected, hopefully pragmatic opinions from a builder’s perspective.

Great notes! I am curious, what language / tech stack would be most promising in this space?

EVM seems to be the hottest, because of early entrance with its own langauges. But WebAssembly in Cosmos, and Solana favors Rust as a programming language but afaik you can use any LLVM compatible. After that it is just a matter of connecting a client to a node, usually done in the browser.

Re: An engineer's observations on Web3 and its possibilities

#159

Not going to lie, I thought and still think that the whole Web 2.0 thing was clever marketing and window dressing on top of fairly pedestrian but useful technologies. It was actually less of seismic shock than mobile first which despite being a bigger shift didn't actually get a number. As far as I'm concerned, Web3 is beyond this. It's what happen when you let Ponzi schemers write the marketing material. I can't for…

Blockchain isn't even central in Web3, but it surely helps. Web3 = decentralized identity, full data and connection graph ownership by user, reputation transfer, verification via zero knowledge proofs, support for VR/AR and 3D objects. All of this stuff is either in prototype or draft phase, but it's ok. These things need to be built to stop horror stories on HN about "algorithm justice" and "data kingdoms”: - Google…

Even if you're logging in with the 'blockchain' they can still ban your account, all of the good usages of 'Web3' I've seen look like WebAuthn but with most possibilities for scams
Post reply on HN