You Don't Own Web3
31–40 of 62 posts
Re: You Don't Own Web3
#32Can someone explain to me what even "Web3" means? It seems like a nonsense buzzword. I mean "Web 2.0" meant ajax, right? And even then it's a silly difference to make, like calling every new addition to the ECMAscript standard a new version of the web...
Isn’t Web3 meant to be decentralized sort of like peer to peer? Or it used to but maybe that’s not a thing anymore.
Re: You Don't Own Web3
#33Web 3.0 means embedded semantic metadata and has since 2012. This nonsense can fuck off. :) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semantic_Web
these VCs have scams like Ethereum which they claim to be p2p networks but all the people making money of this don't even know where the peers are on this p2p network.
The validation nodes run on handful of hosted nodes on a software(ethereum) that changes it's source code and make it backward incompatible all the time, making it centralized at both who develop that code AND the handful of nodes that run it.
a16z has no shame perpetuating these total scams.
Re: You Don't Own Web3
#34Web 3.0 means embedded semantic metadata and has since 2012. This nonsense can fuck off. :) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semantic_Web
Re: You Don't Own Web3
#35Jack is what we lovingly refer to as a Bitcoin maximalist. They are unmoved by innovations that happen outside of the Bitcoin project and tend to call everything that isn't Bitcoin centralized garbage.
There you go. Ethereum maximalists will do anything to pump their investments up by screeching 'web3', 'NFTs' and 'DAOs' and Bitcoin maximalists will also do the same thing. Well I ask both of these maxis, can I use either of them to pay for my groceries quickly, efficiently and cheaply without overpaying for the fees and using a complicated contraptions? If it still doesn't make sense to buy popcorn with bitcoin [0]…
Re: You Don't Own Web3
#36Re: You Don't Own Web3
#37Earlier quoted context omitted.
Exactly. Most of all these cryptocurrencies have failed and they will not survive regulations if they were to come in. > there are very few applications where blockchains make sense (e-sports and games, the SWIFT banking "backend"). Yet even for those a central database is a better technological, and business fit than coins and blockchains while also not being as environmentally damaging. The banks will just use Cent…
Most cryptocurrencies failing is not an argument against them. Most startups fail too (90% in 2019 according to Investopedia[1]). Does that mean no one should invest in, work on, or give a chance to any startups? [1]: https://www.investopedia.com/articles/personal-finance/04091...
My whole comment already implies utility in cryptocurrencies - directly towards payments and towards the parent especially if cryptocurrency regulations were to come in the long term. (with examples)
Tons of other cryptocurrencies are going to fail once regulations arrive and realistically, those that have no serious use-case in general other than being meme or hype coins will wither away.
Re: You Don't Own Web3
#38Web 3.0 means embedded semantic metadata and has since 2012. This nonsense can fuck off. :) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semantic_Web
I realize that you may be joking but that doesn’t stop me from agreeing with you :-)
Re: You Don't Own Web3
#39Web 3.0 means embedded semantic metadata and has since 2012. This nonsense can fuck off. :) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semantic_Web
This tech never really took off and is a stillbirth.
Re: You Don't Own Web3
#40I don't understand how you can't see blockchain/crypto as a growing tech where they might succeed, evolve and grow into the promises that contributors hope for. Why are most people taking a stance either in the crypto bro corner or in the "I can't buy popcorn with it, mah energy hurr durr" corner? The internet wasn't perfect from day one. How about seeing what sticks, what evolves, what problems are being worked on?…