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

Web3 is centralized and inefficient

neelc.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

341–350 of 769 posts

Re: Web3 is centralized and inefficient

#341

Post by prox »

blenderdt wrote: post #322
mmaunder wrote: post #188

I still can't get over that NFT's are just a URL pointing to the data. They don't even have an on-chain hash of the digital asset. It's like selling a sign pointing to houses for the price of the house, and claiming you own the house, hoping that the sign will increase in value the way the house does, and bragging about it. For reference: https://moxie.org/2022/01/07/web3-first-impressions.html

What also is amazing is that people are now buying art for huge amounts of money, not because it's good art or it has any value, but because it's NFT art. So it's even worse than you say, they are selling a sign pointing to a very cheap house, but not for the price of the house but by overvaluing the sign's value.

Because of the speculation and the “hidden” drive to make money (it’s basically a 21th century goldrush) makes it that it will never be what proponents usually advocate (decentralized, everyone benefits, open)

2002-2008 internet (before Facebook) was more Web3 in spirit probably then this Web3 bamboozle.

Re: Web3 is centralized and inefficient

#342

Post by JSavageOne »

This is one of the weakest criticisms to web3 I've seen. Shocked that this is on the front page of HN. Literally every point here has already been talked about and debunked.

> Web3 Platforms are Centralized

The blockchain itself is decentralized, and you don't have to use centralized platforms.

> Mining is Centralized

Sure mining is not as decentralized as we'd like it to be, but it is unquestionably less centralized than the alternative.

> Environmental concerns

Look into "Proof of Stake"

> Blockchain Sucks, Period

Blockchain works very well for its intended applications actually. For example, Ukraine just raised $54 million through crypto. The article doesn't even attempt to construct an argument, so there's nothing to address.

> Blockchain is not the way to decentralization. We need a hyper-efficient system that takes minimal computing resources to scale to a whole planet of users, while making it easy for newcomers to join the network.

Looking forward to your whitepaper on your superior alternative to a blockchain. Until then, we'll stick to blockchains for their intended use cases.

Honestly this article and the comments section is an embarrassment. You guys should actually research what you're criticizing. HN has been anti-crypto since crypto was invented, at this point over a decade later maybe it's time to have some humility and admit that you guys were wrong, and that maybe this thing is actually worth attempting to understand lest you want to continue to be on the wrong side of history

Re: Web3 is centralized and inefficient

#343

Post by koonsolo »

mmaunder wrote: post #188

I still can't get over that NFT's are just a URL pointing to the data. They don't even have an on-chain hash of the digital asset. It's like selling a sign pointing to houses for the price of the house, and claiming you own the house, hoping that the sign will increase in value the way the house does, and bragging about it. For reference: https://moxie.org/2022/01/07/web3-first-impressions.html

Your house analogy is not really correct, since in a digital space, you can have an infinite number of the same house, and an infinite number of people living in that house.

I consider it more like a certificate. Some cool architect made an incredible house. Lots of people live in that exact same house. But there is one who can say he bought the certificate straight from the architect himself. It doesn't give him anything extra legally.

You can indeed argue what extra value this 'certificate' really has, except for some bragging rights. But I think that is the point of it: bragging rights.

Re: Web3 is centralized and inefficient

#344

Post by paxys »

koonsolo wrote: post #343
mmaunder wrote: post #188

I still can't get over that NFT's are just a URL pointing to the data. They don't even have an on-chain hash of the digital asset. It's like selling a sign pointing to houses for the price of the house, and claiming you own the house, hoping that the sign will increase in value the way the house does, and bragging about it. For reference: https://moxie.org/2022/01/07/web3-first-impressions.html

Your house analogy is not really correct, since in a digital space, you can have an infinite number of the same house, and an infinite number of people living in that house. I consider it more like a certificate. Some cool architect made an incredible house. Lots of people live in that exact same house. But there is one who can say he bought the certificate straight from the architect himself. It doesn't give him any…

Exactly. NFTs are digital trading cards. I don't know why people can't wrap their heads around the simple concept.

Re: Web3 is centralized and inefficient

#345

Post by quickthrower2 »

exdsq wrote: post #212
mmaunder wrote: post #188

I still can't get over that NFT's are just a URL pointing to the data. They don't even have an on-chain hash of the digital asset. It's like selling a sign pointing to houses for the price of the house, and claiming you own the house, hoping that the sign will increase in value the way the house does, and bragging about it. For reference: https://moxie.org/2022/01/07/web3-first-impressions.html

To be specific, an NFT can be anything - even a Turing complete program - but common ones are simply containing a string of a URL. Edit: I was loosely involved in some of the conversation around smart contract and token implementation on a top 10 chain and there’s actually a lot of interesting issues with on chain data, such as if child pornography is added suddenly in some countries hosting a node can be seen as dis…

How do you avoid anyone else putting CP on a blockchain because they can. And so a node runner always has this problem regardless of what say OpenSea does for example.

Re: Web3 is centralized and inefficient

#346

Post by binibus »

deepspace wrote: post #304
JaggerFoo wrote: post #286

The massive pace of blockchain technology, applications of math, innovation, and open experimentation is great to see. Don't try to stifle innovation because users are finding ways to interact that are simple, or you think its not decentralized enough. There is great work being done beneath the surface applications you are complaining about - by respected researchers. Cheers

> massive pace of blockchain technology What massive pace of what technology? It's a ledger (1600s technology) protected by a digital signature (30 year old technology). What exactly is the 'innovation' work being done by 'respected researchers'?

Some projects I know where innovation is being done.

Monero [1]: Completely annonymous yet secure currency

Truebit [2]: Decentralized verifiable computation

Oasis [3]: Decentralized, fast and cheap transactions with annonymous smart contracts

Marlin [4]: Infraestructure to speed up any blockchain

[1] https://www.getmonero.org [2] https://truebit.io [3] https://oasisprotocol.org [4] https://www.marlin.org/

Re: Web3 is centralized and inefficient

#347

Post by Tenoke »

yashg wrote: post #248
telomero22 wrote: post #220

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Here are just some of the use cases 1. 100x cheaper, faster cross-border transfers 2. Immutable, digital, accessible, secure ownership of music, video, real-estate, cars, gaming assets, health data 3. Instant access to nearly all possible financial products (loans, lending, startup investments etc.) without a middle man There are many, many more use cases. Crypto drastically increases accountability, transparency, ac…

1. Nope. Still need to convert it to real money for buying something. Gas fees > transfer fees. 2. Nope. It doesn't grant any ownership. It's a just a pointer to a file on third party server. Ownership is enforced by a central authority. Code is not law. 3. Nope. Without an underlying economic activity it's all a ponzi scheme. There is no finance in DeFi. Just scammers running pump and dump schemes and rugpulling sta…

>3. Nope. Without an underlying economic activity it's all a ponzi scheme. There is no finance in DeFi. Just scammers running pump and dump schemes and rugpulling starry eyed idiots who think centuries old financial principals are useless and want to make a quick buck without doing anything.

There's plenty of projcts ran by people who are clearly not trying to scam anyone. Time will tell whether they will actually be successful but you are clearly biased again and not even attempting to be objective.

Re: Web3 is centralized and inefficient

#348

Post by tlamponi »

FeepingCreature wrote: post #284
dmitriid wrote: post #256

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"It's interesting because I can hoard tickets and resell at profit". Why is that interesting, exactly? Edit All that is marked as "interesting" in crypto is inevitably "how can I profit/get rich quick off something".

In a proper market, it is impossible to resell because the sales price is the production price. So if the free-market price of the ticket is higher than the sales price, people should be producing additional Woodstocks until the prices match. At which point there is no point in being a scalper anymore. Scalping is only an issue if the sales price of products is artificially depressed.

But Woodstock, or any other tickets are a limited resource by definition, the venue can cope with X amount of people there, where X is at max some area dependent value and can be limited further by safety measurements and/or law.

So your "proper market" criteria doesn't really exist for anything but digital or virtual goods.

Re: Web3 is centralized and inefficient

#349

Post by Cthulhu_ »

JSavageOne wrote: post #342

This is one of the weakest criticisms to web3 I've seen. Shocked that this is on the front page of HN. Literally every point here has already been talked about and debunked. > Web3 Platforms are Centralized The blockchain itself is decentralized, and you don't have to use centralized platforms. > Mining is Centralized Sure mining is not as decentralized as we'd like it to be, but it is unquestionably less centralized…

> and you don't have to use centralized platforms.

Sure, but you'd be missing out on the benefits of the blockchain. Who will buy your paint monkey image certificate of authenticity - let alone pay a small fortune for it - if you put it up for sale on your own website instead of the big exchange where all the whales scout for their next target to over-inflate? You're right in theory, but market forces push towards centralization.

> but it is unquestionably less centralized than the alternative.

This is true, but the alternative has (literal) checks and balances, fallbacks, and legal forces in place to ensure supply and stability of the currency.

> For example, Ukraine just raised $54 million through crypto. The article doesn't even attempt to construct an argument, so there's nothing to address.

And billions in international foreign and military aid through non-crypto means; it's pocket change pushed by cryptobros that want to promote their money-making scheme.

> Looking forward to your whitepaper on your superior alternative to a blockchain.

Traditional banking. Traditional banking and fiat money is good. I mean nobody actually pays anything with crypto because of inconvenience, transfer costs, speed and value instability; it's an asset used to convert from / to fiat money, it's an investment product, it's a ledger of certificates for poorly drawn or generated jpegs.

And it's argumentative comments like this that make me resent it more and more. The only success stories and practical applications for crypto and blockchain technology I've heard is people getting rich off it. The libertarian dream; the freedom to weasel money out of easily hyped people without having to pay taxes over it.

And you know I'm salty because like everybody else, "I should've bought bitcoin ten years ago".

Re: Web3 is centralized and inefficient

#350

Post by 0xRolex »

happymellon wrote: post #305
divs1210 wrote: post #254

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's not why making an NFT out of the ticket is interesting. It's interesting because I can, for example, resell my Woodstock ticket on an open market.

You can resell your paper, or email ticket already. How does blockchain make it interesting?

No need to expose yourself, possible anonimity and most important one, the absolute lack of need of a third party which is the thing that most find intresting about blockchains usecases.
Post reply on HN