web2: client server web3: client client client
If you need to connect to a fullnode which is running in a datacenter somewhere whose sole purpose is to service these kinds of requests, surely it's just a server.
31–40 of 220 posts
web2: client server web3: client client client
If you need to connect to a fullnode which is running in a datacenter somewhere whose sole purpose is to service these kinds of requests, surely it's just a server.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> web3 is just the web where the backend is something on the blockchain even more broad, i think web3 is just where the database is decentralized. blockchain is one solution.
If it's just when the database is decentralized, why even call it web3? Why should web standards even care about implementation details of the database? We didn't move to "web3" when db sharding became a big thing, or when NoSQL caught on.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Wait, let me get this straight - your company has the non-sharded encryption key (not the user), it centralized by your service, and all of that is subject to google's whims. Yep, sounds like the heart of web3.
Metamask is distributed through Google as well, and it operates in Chrome. It would be easier to let me know what web3 technology is not subject to Google's whims!
Even an ideal blockchain-ified P2P "Web 3.0" is a silly fantasy on par with NAT-less IPv4. First they reinvented gold & databases, now they are reinventing IP. Flat networks are a thing of the past, when you could keep the whole Internet in a paper directory on your desk. Blockchains may be used for settlement and accounting within small networks of international firms, but they will never service the latency and thr…
HN comments that use the word "never" should raise eyebrows. You're not wrong if you assume technology is fixed. But it ain't.
That could be solved by splitting into local blockchains so the global network only handles transactions between local banks but that seems like it's basically giving up most of the benefits claimed in blockchain marketing.
Some valid arguments, but in reality web3 is just the web where the backend is something on the blockchain. It makes sense to talk about how to make this experience more secure, but to say the whole thing is a stupid idea doesn't benefit anyone, because a lot of people want it and are going to use it. By the way, most web wallets have hardware support, so you can add an additional layer of security that way.
Sounds like you didn't read the article.
Some valid arguments, but in reality web3 is just the web where the backend is something on the blockchain. It makes sense to talk about how to make this experience more secure, but to say the whole thing is a stupid idea doesn't benefit anyone, because a lot of people want it and are going to use it. By the way, most web wallets have hardware support, so you can add an additional layer of security that way.
> web3 is just the web where the backend is something on the blockchain even more broad, i think web3 is just where the database is decentralized. blockchain is one solution.
1. consensus networks, 2. data storage networks, 3. messaging networks.
(1) includes Ethereum and other blockchain and distributed ledger tech.
(2) includes IPFS, FileCoin, GUN, etc.
If you're storing data on the blockchain apart from the bits needed in relation to consensus ops, you're probably doing it wrong.
(3) includes Waku (Status), Matrix ... depends a bit on whether you think this category should only include p2p networks or federated networks of servers qualify.
There are many other projects that could be listed for those categories, those are just off the top of my head.
It's much easier to criticize than to build an alternative. I don't think anyone at Metamask or in the space in general thinks to themselves that the ecosystem is in a state of full maturity or that there aren't major problems. Despite its shortcomings, MM and Web3 have given us capabilities that simply didn't exist five years ago. And those capabilities aren't just limited to a select number of shadowy super hackers…
To be fair, in the article I at least outline alternative approaches. And in any case, I believe that by building a commercial product like MM, their makers unwillingly shut the door a bit more for a more standardized approach. Not actively, but simply just by mere existence.
Things progress in many ways, and that is really important. Diversity of ideas and implementations of ideas spark real advances in unpredictable ways. What matters is that new things are being imagined, built and experience with them is being gained.