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

Web3 is centralized

blog.wesleyac.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

151–160 of 497 posts

Re: Web3 is centralized

#151

Post by Uptrenda »

BTW: I see people being confused about what web3 even means. If I had to define it I'd say its the group of technologies and infrastructure that support 'decentralized applications.' The term probably comes from Ethereum where several layers are used to run an application: like 'decentralized DNS' (find an app), 'decentralized file storage' (stores front end code), 'business logic for the application' (blockchain), and so on.

It's a powerful idea but it doesn't make sense to try write every app as a dapp. For example, there's probably no benefits to putting cat pics as a dapp and making them sharable in perpetuality. But a decentralized exchange could be useful.

Re: Web3 is centralized

#152

Post by emerongi »

colesantiago wrote: post #88
foepys wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is all possible today, no web3 required. Logins with client certificates were solved decades ago and "owning" items digitally is something many services can do for you, see Steam, Amazon Video, Apple iTunes etc. To get those services to give up control and put all their things into web3 is a pipedream.

> Logins with client certificates were solved decades ago Just because you claim it was ‘solved decades ago’ doesn’t mean it’s easier for the average joe. I find that wallet login is much easier, no fumbling around with ‘certificates’ required, and I even hate crypto.

...aren't certificates "crypto", just in the actual original meaning of the word?

Re: Web3 is centralized

#153

Post by m00dy »

foepys wrote: post #55
m00dy wrote: post #48

I like to login web-apps using my wallet. I like to see things that I own in my wallet. I think we should give a chance to web3.

This is all possible today, no web3 required. Logins with client certificates were solved decades ago and "owning" items digitally is something many services can do for you, see Steam, Amazon Video, Apple iTunes etc. To get those services to give up control and put all their things into web3 is a pipedream.

I want to own things I want to have permission-less world

Re: Web3 is centralized

#154

Post by prox »

Freskis wrote: post #86
neuroma wrote: post #72

It's fascinating how on hacker news one typically finds detailed, reasoned and thoughtful comments. However on the topic of crypto and web3 the comments reliably degenerate into partisan tit for tat, consisting mainly of poorly researched, unreasoned sound bytes. It's a pity because I'd love to hear quality thought on the space. My personal view is that crypto and Web3 "are a thing" (Mean Girls) and will continue to…

For most people, crypto is about money, not tech. Easy money, quick money. Therefore the spam level of any crypto discussion is so huge that the opinion gets drowned out by the propaganda.

It smells like the .com boom/bust all over again. Like you say, money drives the discussion, not tech. Which is indeed unfortunate.

Re: Web3 is centralized

#155

Post by andreareina »

darawk wrote: post #87
neuroma wrote: post #72

It's fascinating how on hacker news one typically finds detailed, reasoned and thoughtful comments. However on the topic of crypto and web3 the comments reliably degenerate into partisan tit for tat, consisting mainly of poorly researched, unreasoned sound bytes. It's a pity because I'd love to hear quality thought on the space. My personal view is that crypto and Web3 "are a thing" (Mean Girls) and will continue to…

Agree completely. There is a ton to criticize about crypto and "Web3" (I hate the term, tbh). It's rife with scams and unearned wealth. Even the things that aren't outright scams are mostly people selling hype. But this technology does enable something novel. Digital self-custody of scarce assets is a new thing. A thing that nobody could do before this stuff. And if that has utility, then the infrastructure for tradi…

By calling it web3 they are explicitly positioning it in terms of, and in contrast to, the traditional web. If they wanted to call out finance there's defi for that.

Re: Web3 is centralized

#156

Post by mmcnl »

neuroma wrote: post #72

It's fascinating how on hacker news one typically finds detailed, reasoned and thoughtful comments. However on the topic of crypto and web3 the comments reliably degenerate into partisan tit for tat, consisting mainly of poorly researched, unreasoned sound bytes. It's a pity because I'd love to hear quality thought on the space. My personal view is that crypto and Web3 "are a thing" (Mean Girls) and will continue to…

Apparently it's unfathomable that detailed, reasoned and thoughtful comments are actually critical of web 3. Here's a thought: could it be that web 3 actually deserves some legitimate criticism? Maybe HN is right and you're wrong?

Re: Web3 is centralized

#157

Post by pcthrowaway »

Findeton wrote: post #113
pcthrowaway wrote: post #99

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ahh the blockchain created by the fraudster claiming to be Satoshi.

Sure but have you looked into the technology?

It's not bad, but it's proof of work which I'm not really interested in at this point.

Re: Web3 is centralized

#158

Post by Ambolia »

tehbeard wrote: post #138
darawk wrote: post #87

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Agree completely. There is a ton to criticize about crypto and "Web3" (I hate the term, tbh). It's rife with scams and unearned wealth. Even the things that aren't outright scams are mostly people selling hype. But this technology does enable something novel. Digital self-custody of scarce assets is a new thing. A thing that nobody could do before this stuff. And if that has utility, then the infrastructure for tradi…

> But this technology does enable something novel. Digital self-custody of scarce assets is a new thing. ... It gives you a receipt. A digital receipt. That points to a URL that may or may not exist in 10 years?

That sounds terrible, from hearing about NFTs I expected they would be a hash of the file, not a link to a file.

Not like a hash would be much better, as changing one pixel would give you a different hash, but at least it would represent a specific version of an image, a URL could change to anything tomorrow.

Re: Web3 is centralized

#159

Post by cryptica »

elevader wrote: post #139
cryptica wrote: post #133

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I suspect that big corporations and big investment firms are pumping a lot of money into the cryptocurrency space to prevent innovation and to encourage scams in order to discredit the space. They want to buy it up, hype it up, then dump their bags on mom-and-pop investors while attempting a controlled demolition of the space. This might sound far-fetched to outsiders, but not so far-fetched to those who have worked…

Honest question from a total outsider: What is the difference between a "shitcoin" and a "legitimate token"? And who gets to decide that?

I've met founders who launched shitcoins which raised a lot of money who acknowledged with no sense of irony that their own token was a shitcoin.

But in general, a shitcoin is a poorly designed project (or just a clone of an existing project) where the founder sells a lot of their tokens and quits immediately after the initial ITO/ICO sale.

Re: Web3 is centralized

#160

Post by seanhunter »

vmception wrote: post #23
chrisco255 wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> are an absolute boon to tax collectors, forensic accountants and fraudsters Weird that it would be a boon for both forensic accountants and fraudsters. How do you reconcile that sentence? The fact that something is done in public does not mean that it is centralized. There is public and decentralized, public and centralized, private and centralized, and private and decentralized. Decentralization itself, is a spect…

> Weird that it would be a boon for both forensic accountants and fraudsters. How do you reconcile that sentence? It is very common to track people by the tokens they hold and target them for theft and fraud. One example is to airdrop a backdoored token, and when the user tries to move it they wind up authorizing movement of their other valuable tokens. Or to just use the airdrop to lead a curious user to the airdrop…

Looking at the token standards[1], I can't see how you could create a "backdoored token" that would authorize movement of other tokens but that sounds like a scary threat vector. Could you explain how that would work please?

I've heard about ERC20 tokens that allowed the issuer to pull them back (that's the SoarCoin thing[2]) but not a token that allowed other tokens to be transferred.

[1] https://eips.ethereum.org/EIPS/eip-721 https://eips.ethereum.org/EIPS/eip-998 https://eips.ethereum.org/EIPS/eip-1155 [2] https://iterative.capital/erc20-backdoor-allows-you-to-steal...

Post reply on HN