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

241–250 of 497 posts

Re: Web3 is centralized

#241

Post by spiddy »

captn3m0 wrote: post #147
spiddy wrote: post #124

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I tend to look closely into projects that are outside of the echo chamber that can provide real world value and better economic models than web2 solutions. My two favorites are: helium where they build IoT global network, I use a helium GPS-alternative tracker for my moto which costs 10 times less than GPS tracker. scPrime (although there are other storage alternatives) which build global S3-compatible storage using…

Helium is very much centralised because it has to (by the nature of their offering) lock down the end-user devices heavily. They have a single approved manufacturer last I checked. It essentially operates as a unregistered and unregulated ISP and that isn’t something to be taken lightly. It does that by pushing all legal and regulatory liability to operators. There’s also a lot of scams with operators faking their si…

> Helium is very much centralised because it has to (by the nature of their offering) lock down the end-user devices heavily. They have a single approved manufacturer last I checked.

As far as I can see there are currently 19 approved device manufacturers [0].

> It essentially operates as a unregistered and unregulated ISP and that isn’t something to be taken lightly. It does that by pushing all legal and regulatory liability to operators. There’s also a lot of scams with operators faking their signal etc.

Scams faking their signal will only help improve the robustness of the network on the long run as these are fixable issues.

Regulation seems to be spurring on every web3 conversation. I believe regulation is lagging behind user adoption and is a pending conversation. As for the exact scenario (LORA network) what kind of regulation do we __want__ the network to have? I don't think blocking user traffic is something we want to have, as an example you mentioned with current ISPs.

[0]: https://www.helium.com/mine

Re: Web3 is centralized

#242

Post by lottin »

everfree wrote: post #110
vmception wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And also Secret Network, which hides smart contract variables, which therefore includes token and wrapped token amounts, along with the current owner. Monero has a trustless-enough bridge over to there.

And also Aztec Network, and Tornado Cash, and Zcash, and soon Starkware, and... I'm surprised so many people on Hacker News apparently still believe that you can "see all transactions" on every blockchain. It really only takes some surface level research to find working, production blockchains/cryptocurrencies that use one of several types of cryptography to hide that data, plus if you're using a pseudonymous blockch…

Well, you have to see all transactions, in order to know the current balances on every wallet, in order to prevent double spending. This is, in fact, the whole principle on which blockchains operate.

Re: Web3 is centralized

#243

Post by exo762 »

emerongi wrote: post #152
colesantiago wrote: post #88

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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?

Both of them are crypto in original meaning of the word. The difference - UX of wallet-based solutions is infinitely better that UX of browser-handled user certs.

Re: Web3 is centralized

#244

Post by gitfan86 »

sergiomattei wrote: post #51
dudus wrote: post #28

Crypto market is really sad. It's a novel technical solution. But it can't find a problem where it fits as a good alternative. It's not a good alternative to banks, art collections or web hosting. But Bitcoin is still worth billions, NFT are all the rage and Web3 went from new concept to "trend" in the span of what feels like a week. But even with all the success they don't seem to be convincing many they have any in…

Yes, completely glossing over the usefulness of digital-native money: instant, verifiable transactions from anywhere in the world, programmable money and low fees. Oh, and how it disrupts the remittances industry, something extremely useful to vulnerable communities with families abroad. I agree that Web3 is mostly a grift, but cryptocurrencies are quite useful already.

It is exactly the same situation as the Dot Com bubble. Enormous amounts of money and hype are being poured into a new promising technology. So you end up with people convincing themselves that WebVan and Pets.com will be the future of grocery delivery or buying pet products.

And today it is "BTC is the ONLY internet Money", "Ethereum will be the ONLY way people can execute smart contracts in the future". Invest Now!

Re: Web3 is centralized

#245

Post by headmelted »

jakupovic wrote: post #232
headmelted wrote: post #180

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think at this point we’re just so far past the point of having reasonable discourse on this topic that it will not be possible to have a reasoned discussion about it ever again, anywhere, regardless. Personally I have to fight my own rising blood temperature to even discuss it as being “a thing”, because people have such fundamentally different views on what that thing is, and I believe the argument is made in bad…

>Adherents would have you believe that the current price, whatever it is at a given point, must mean some variant of “can all these people really be wrong? That’s ridiculous”. It’s not a reasonable starting point for a discussion, and then it immediately breaks down again. But it is reasonable to dismiss the whole field because you think it's a scam? Please read what you write before you post, as this is meaningless…

This is simply saying “can all these people be wrong?” in other words.

What I wrote is absolutely logical as best I can tell. I didn’t say it’s a scam (although that community is riddled with those too). I said it’s a collection of ponzi schemes (for which there is far more evidence to support than it being a financial revolution).

Charles Ponzi genuinely believed he had revolutionised finance, too.

All you’ve essentially said here is “Lots of people hyping on social media, therefore no scam, shut up fool”.

Re: Web3 is centralized

#246

Post by Vetch »

root_axis wrote: post #121
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…

Over the years I've witnessed a lot of heated debates on HN... Is the JS ecosystem actually too complex? Is PHP really a fractal of bad design? Is learning vim worth the effort or is it all hype? Is golang fundamentally broken because it lacks(lacked) generics? Does anyone ever actually need k8s? Is nosql always the wrong choice? Is the linux desktop experience truly productive or should you just use a mac? Types or…

> scams, vaporware, fraud, waste, crime

In my country, this also describes the day to day situation. You can't trust doctors because they make up diagnoses, people pay taxes but it never shows up in infrastructure, schools or anywhere; daily alerts by banks warning against some new clever form of fraud, until recently there was a fair chance new banks would vanish with customer money (I still only trust a few reputable banks), actual family destroying pyramid schemes, ransoms attached to child kidnappings not data, politicians stealing from their constituents, police not trusted because of lack of transparency and corruption, bribes as a defacto tax.

The combination of high levels of poverty and lack of regulation is what leads to the proliferation of scams and dishonest behaviors. Poverty lowers the threshold of criminality, lack of regulation and lack of an enforced justice system enables its flourishing. Poverty also catalyzes more susceptible victims of such crimes.

-------

> only in the cryptocurrency debate do defenders have to offer up a disclaimer

Financial activity in crypto lacks regulation, which attracts predators, who create scams that attract the poor who are not necessarily gullible, just gambles from desperation.

> Android or iPhone

In Android vs iPhone or Windows vs Mac, people do argue about vulnerability to malware and the merits and demerits of locked down platforms.

I'd also argue your examples are not appropriate, they're more clashes of belief systems and less people freely interacting in market like scenarios. Consider that kickstarter is rife with vaporware, hype and scams. Scams, fraud and hacks in Roblox and Entropia. Crime, speculation and hacks in Habbo Hotel. Western financial systems discriminate against certain professions and citizens of entire countries due to some cost benefit calculations related to fraud.

If you have a system where money can exchange hands, you'll find psychopaths preying on the poor and careless. Oh and this isn't just poor countries and virtual markets, psychopaths preying on the poor and desperate also occurs for developed countries too (you just give them fancy names like debt bubbles and mortgage crises).

Re: Web3 is centralized

#247

Post by dmead »

aiisahik wrote: post #228

So many people complaining about web3 being: - more centralized - more controlled by VCs - less performant / reliable / secure than web2 These are probably all true for now. They failed to see the key features web3: 1. the possibility (but not guarantee) to operate in a hostile government / regulatory environment 2. the possibility (but not guarantee) to operate without a legal entity without shareholders / boards We…

Trading tokens on a ledger definitely has zero impact on larger human civilization.

Im really entertained by other nerds making wild claims like this. It's like the internet is jumping the shark. We just don't know what to do with all this anymore. Problems are being created so we can come up with solutions nobody asked for.

Re: Web3 is centralized

#248

Post by d6a0r0t »

What if I Set up a node with an independent protocol who has followed regulation and keep it up and all of us do the same....

Then WE- are web 3.

Its only centralized if we ALL do not stay true and totally redesign!--usually for profit.

Should we judge the chess board before we play?

Believing decentralization promises are gone again then, Jojo?

Dont believe scared billionaire news. They want you banking on CBDCs --and they cant get that until all of the threats (programmers contributing to HN) are full of disillussionment and quit dissenting and creating well designed decentralized blockchains.

Get away from sold out Bitcoin and ETH and coinbase and the like.

Node up with projects that are Designed for and Maintain Decentralizarion. My fav is Polkadot.

Doing Our part by never working for or supporting sold out protocols is centralizations' threat.

When CBDCs come around its free coins and those are going to be like zombie manna. Dont eat zombie manna.

So node up. We still write the rules!

Until its MUSK Web3, its still open game for us to make it-- ours.

What are you here for anyway?

Node up. Just pick an independent project thats adhereing to regulations.

Below is proof of my argument. (view all for full effect)

coindesk.com/markets/2016/01/30/how-to-save-bitcoins-node-network-from-centralization/

protocol.com/fintech/polkadot-ethereum-gavin-wood

"Whether a blockchain is centralized or decentralized simply refers to the rights of participants on the ledger, and is therefore a question of design."

https://www.finra.org/sites/default/files/2017_BC_Byte.pdf

Re: Web3 is centralized

#249

Post by exo762 »

ngcc_hk wrote: post #176

Blockchain is horrible as it is totally logged and transparent for all. It is totally centralised from totalitarian country point of view. The security by covering up does not work for many, let alone you use this for web access. Think China every time you do any human work. Be free and not be bound. Totalitarian does not pay for humanity.

I agree with you on some level - blockchains have an financial information leakage problem that needs to be addressed. But the difference with legacy systems is not on the government level - you don't have ANY financial privacy from your government, and this is by design. There is difference however in that on blockchain you have no financial privacy from anyone (so from other government, including totalitarian ones, from moral busy-bodies, from criminals etc).

There are some projects that try to address this. For payments that is (famously) Monero and ZCash. There is nothing in production for smart-contract-like capability ATM. But there are attempts to build such capability on top of ZEXE [0] paper and there is Aleph-Zero [1], which is unlikely to succeed (they bought DAG idea, and they will fail), but their research/code is likely to spawn better variants.

[0]: https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/abstract/document/9152634/ [1]: https://alephzero.org/

Re: Web3 is centralized

#250

Post by SoldShort22 »

jakupovic wrote: post #216
SoldShort22 wrote: post #125

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Digital self-custody of scarce assets is a new thing But what really are the "scarce assets" that Web3 is enabling self-custody for? A token on a blockchain that has metadata pointing to a digital file that anyone can view and reproduce? By definition, every NFT is scarce in that each one is non-fungible. But this scarcity doesn't mean there's any meaningful value. An NFT alone doesn't inherently give you ownership…

Do you need someone to repeat what's scarce? The digital anything can be written down in the blockchain notebook with your name/key and it's yours then. Same as when you would get a C from your teacher who would write it into one of those big notebooks with everyone's names. That combination of your name + class + grade is the asset uniquely assigned to you. Now when you asked your teacher to change that C to a B, to…

I would suggest that your argument doesn't pay enough attention to the second word in "scarce asset" -- asset.

These unique tokens almost always point to digital files that are accessible to everyone and anyone, and that can be viewed, downloaded and reproduced by everyone and anyone.

To the extent that a person might consider these files are "assets" at all, the bigger issue is that ownership of a non-fungible token is still just ownership of a non-fungible token. It doesn't on its own convey any ownership of or economic interest in the "asset" it points to. If you want the token to convey ownership or economic rights, you're back to the traditional legal and financial worlds Web3 is supposed to be supplanting.

To the extent that a person might consider the NFT itself to be an "asset", the question is where the value is derived if the NFT is merely a pointer to a digital file that you don't have ownership of or an economic interest in.

Post reply on HN