221–230 of 316 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> threats to very powerful people Same people who also control the hash rate? :)
Hashing power is not the only line of defence. The (non-mining) nodes have the ability to reject blocks that they don't consider legitimate. That's why it's important to the Bitcoin community that the average person can run a full node and that as many people as possible also do so.
I don't get the extreme positions on that. There will be some sort of web3 and will be really relevant for some bigger groups of people. Saying that it should die and (the other extreme) saying "it's the solution for everything" is just ignorant.
The "it should die" camp take their view literally. At issue for many of us is the rampant consumption of resources to keep web3/cryptomining going. The ends( ) do not justify the means. ( ) for any variation of "ends" people have come up with so far.
Web3 makes a lot of sense to me. The people that got into Bitcoin early are now out and ridiculously rich. Other people also wanted to get rich, but that exact opportunity feels like it passed (still holding out for my $80 invested in Bitcoin to be worth >$100,000, but I got in kind of late), so people started making their own coins in the hopes of repeating the process. That had mixed success, Etherium (and maybe Do…
are you implying people get rich from doing actual work?
The original tweet was asking for "any future of python in web3 domain? specific in @ethereum @solana" Web3.js - the 7 year old library for communicating with any EVM has an actively maintained and fully featured python version. Solana.py is available for the Solana ecosystem These libraries typically make it very easy to connect to the nearest node, which you can treat as pay-once-read-forever compute instances. Whe…
> These libraries typically make it very easy to connect to the nearest node, which you can treat as pay-once-read-forever compute instances. Where reading and and all bandwidth is free. > You can completely ignore the cringy ideology if you prefer to and just accept that people are willing to store your crap for free forever. These are extremely strong and unusual claims. Computers and storage and bandwidth and powe…
What I described is actually a cynical description of blockchains, but blockchain nodes store everything written in perpetuity. a subset of that information is necessary to sustain the blockchain, there are reasons why some nodes store more than what is necessary. if you are willing to pay to store more information, there are a lot of free backups of it automatically, which are also free to recover from, as many times as you want. that competes directly with the SaaS model that charges or meters uploading the information, reading the information, downloading the information, storing the information, accessing the information or some combination thereof. those SaaS services also come with the questions of how long that information will remain available.
Web3 makes a lot of sense to me. The people that got into Bitcoin early are now out and ridiculously rich. Other people also wanted to get rich, but that exact opportunity feels like it passed (still holding out for my $80 invested in Bitcoin to be worth >$100,000, but I got in kind of late), so people started making their own coins in the hopes of repeating the process. That had mixed success, Etherium (and maybe Do…
- crypto - meme stocks - NFTs
There needs to be another innovation where hype can build around some narrative so people can get rich quick. Web3 has terrific product-market fit.
I think Guido would enjoy this site then: https://web3isgoinggreat.com/
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The original definition of Web 3.0 (or Semantic Web) was conceived by Tim Berners-Lee and meant something completely different, it referred to a web that had all information assembled into an open graph that was easily accessible and machine readable with the goal of leading to an AI revolution. AFAICT the "web3" moniker was co-opted by Ethereum developers to refer to something which is almost entirely opposed to tha…
This. The Semantic Web produced some interesting technologies that lost their cool factor and dissolved into the background (SPARQL, graph DBs... etc.). Ontology everywhere simply never caught on because it wasn't worth it. This co-opting of term by blockchain-backed everything is for something actively dangerous as opposed to simply too little bang for too much buck.
I personally think it's very fitting that web3 is now hijacked by crypto, another utopia dream that tries to deny the benefits of government and human judgement in the rule of law
I've reached a point where I'm tired of discussing the possibilities/potential/revolution of crypto and blockchain. Is there anything I can use today, or must I keep waiting for this hypothetical future?
I can walk you through some of the useful stuff going on if you want to have a chat.
Offer valid for anyone else.
The interesting thing about crypto to me is how there seems to be a deep divide among very smart people, some who think it's the greatest thing ever and some who think it's a fraud. I can't remember when there's ever been such a Bigendian-scale dispute in technology before. Can you?
That's because it's a combination of envy and the fact it's mostly a ponzi. Many people got into 8 or 9 figures from ~zero by being active into crypto, they are overwhelmingly below 40 years old. Basically everyone in tech heard about crypto years ago. If you missed it, you can either admit to yourself you missed probably the easiest way to get rich in your entire life, or rationalize to yourself it's all a scam and…
Turns out both concerns were largely correct. The part I missed was that people would still buy it anyway. I don't really feel bad about the decision since the process that lead me to it will work out more often than not. I'm sure plenty of tech folks had a similar thought process.
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 fungibl…
I guess that's the case if your refinery is producing absolutely nothing of value.
That's the overall point of critics: web3 has huge costs for tiny (and disputable) benefits.
Even your comment lacks any benefits of web3. Making electricity more expensive isn't a benefit at all. It sure won't put a colony on the moon. And we were already able to turn electricity into "information" using an invention called a "computer."