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

Guido van Rossum: Let Web3 die in a flaming ball of fire

twitter.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

201–210 of 316 posts

Re: Guido van Rossum: Let Web3 die in a flaming ball of fire

#201

Post by paxys »

shadowgovt wrote: post #72
Pmop wrote: post #62

Works for me. We enjoy the same benefits high capital enjoys when investing on crypto. Saves lots on paperwork and taxes. Plus, now I can save my wealth from being stolen by the govt when it decides to print it's way into our 6th currency.

I'm not sure what country you're in, but in the US at least, BTC is taxable. The fact it's somewhat simpler to hide from the IRS doesn't mean you're safe when they audit you and ask about the movement of cash to / from exchanges.

You also aren't hiding anything from the IRS considering every crypto exchange is reporting all your transactions to them.

Re: Guido van Rossum: Let Web3 die in a flaming ball of fire

#202

Post by betwixthewires »

akavi wrote: post #83
zelag wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

People like Ari Juels, Gavin Wood and Vitalik Buterin aren't intelligent to you?

Vitalik's the only person in the entire crypto space that gives me pause about my belief crypto is 90% a mixture of useless and fraudulent. He's clearly much more intelligent than me and much more thoughtful, and has come to the opposite conclusions about the topic. I really don't know how to square that with basically everyone else in the space being clearly morons or hucksters.

Maybe how you square it is "if a really smart person disagrees with me, might I possibly be wrong?"

Lucrative opportunities attract frauds. The dot com boom attracted frauds, was the internet a big scam? Literally every technological development in history that was potentially very lucrative attracted swathes of con men. For every stock worth purchasing there are a dozen garbage ones. For every innovative product you can buy online there are dozens of cheap worthless pieces of junk. The fact that idiots and scumbags are attracted to crypto only means there's money to be made, it says nothing about the actual utility of the technology.

Re: Guido van Rossum: Let Web3 die in a flaming ball of fire

#204

Post by vmception »

cableshaft wrote: post #126
ipaddr wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Pay once read forever is the latest scam. Pay once read until it stops working.

No different than any Web 2.0 website there. Except in Web 2.0 it's whenever the business decides to stop paying to keep the servers going and supporting that content (or until they go out of business), whereas for 3.0 it's when the whole network goes down, not a particular company. Happens all the time. Nintendo announced they're shutting off their Wii U and 3DS eShops next March, for example. At that point players…

right! and from the developer's perspective - who needs to either host a web 2.0 website or connect to a service from a compute instance that developer set up somewhere - the costs are very competitive and extremely attractive when it comes to utilizing nodes in a blockchain. You write once which is just a transaction fee to the network (formula can be complex and expensive, or pretty cheap, but just once) and are not billed for reads or the bandwidth used.

Re: Guido van Rossum: Let Web3 die in a flaming ball of fire

#205

Post by TaylorAlexander »

mattwilsonn888 wrote: post #59

Isn't a brutish tweet still a brutish tweet no matter who its from? There have been infinitely more interesting crypto conversation starters on this board than this - I don't care who the author is - I care about the content, of which this has none.

It should be pretty clear that the content is “Guido van Rossum sees no value in web3” or “van Rossum sees web3 as harmful and unhelpful”.

The manner in which it is stated may produce other feelings when reading it but the content is still there.

Re: Guido van Rossum: Let Web3 die in a flaming ball of fire

#206

Post by camdenlock »

Isn’t Guido actually making a political gesture here? There is no technical argument.

One side signals their allegiance to centralization as a philosophy of government; the other side signals their allegiance to decentralization.

It’s similar to the recent dust-up over masking: one side craves centralized, top-down, totalizing governance by experts; the other side craves decentralized power, maximizing individual liberty. Both sides loudly advertise their allegiances.

Re: Guido van Rossum: Let Web3 die in a flaming ball of fire

#207

Post by eminence32 »

ozim wrote: post #164
mattwilsonn888 wrote: post #59

Isn't a brutish tweet still a brutish tweet no matter who its from? There have been infinitely more interesting crypto conversation starters on this board than this - I don't care who the author is - I care about the content, of which this has none.

If you notice that this tweet is a reply to a person that called Guido out who seems to be somewhat pushy about calling people out - it is a perfectly fine answer. If someone on the street comes out of the blue and wants something from me there is no obligation that I have to be nice. Especially if that someone seems to be building his personal profile on calling out people on TT.

I really really wish twitter would change their UI to make it more obvious that I can scroll up to view the parent tweet. I didn't realize this until I read your comment.

Re: Guido van Rossum: Let Web3 die in a flaming ball of fire

#208

Post by motohagiography »

The quality of arguments against web3 seem related to a trend where smart people indulge in acting dumb on twitter because it feels powerful. It's just an off the cuff tweet by a giant of our age, not some ex cathedra papal bull.

The basic innovation of proof of work is that it sidesteps the need to solve hard economic problems of energy storage and transmission and lets you turn energy where you find it into fungible, valuable compute and transmit it back as information. Economically, this means if you can find power, you can refine and sell it in the form of mining compute, which means I can make money that enables a supply line to wherever I can harvest an energy source.

Once we figure out solar efficiency and more efficient processors, it's how we can fund colonies on the moon, develop remote regions, and decouple some of our economic activity from geography. It's the most fundamental and pure form of value added manufacturing. When you view miners as electricity refineries, it's pretty simple.

Maybe I'm being dumb and web3 dies in a fire, but if it sucks that badly, maybe I just don't see how its critics are taking the other side of that bet. Even though I like who web3 annoys and why, seeing them at less than their best is unsatisfying.

Re: Guido van Rossum: Let Web3 die in a flaming ball of fire

#209

Post by Loughla »

awr wrote: post #127

I'm skeptical about the ecosystem as a whole, despite running a project myself, but a distinction needs to be made between web3 as a technology and web3 in its current iteration. I do believe there's something there around business model innovations (e.g. near fee-less micro-transactions tied to a crypto identity as a low impedance alternative to SSO). Concretely, if I can jump onto a website and consume content with…

>Sure, pay 25c via crypto wallet (2 clicks), read article, move on.

1. Couldn't this be done with just a credit card if companies took micro payments? My browser will save my cc details, so if they accepted micro payments, I could just click one button to get it.

2. Why would companies, who do not accept micropayments now, suddenly accept them just because crypto?

3. Wouldn't I still have to enter information into the system (more than 2 clicks)? Or would everyone just have access to my information all the time?

I don't get why crypto needs to be involved here, or how it forces companies to accept micro-payments.

Re: Guido van Rossum: Let Web3 die in a flaming ball of fire

#210

Post by boringg »

TedShiller wrote: post #203

It already is. ‘Jack Dorsey’s First Tweet’ NFT Went on Sale for $48M. It Ended With a Top Bid of Just $280. I'm actually shocked someone would pay $280 for it. https://www.coindesk.com/business/2022/04/13/jack-dorseys-fi...

This is beautiful.
Post reply on HN