Web3 is centralized • Hacker News Board

Re: Web3 is centralized

#491

Post by everfree » Mon, Jan 03, 2022, 6:09 PM UTC

withinboredom wrote: post #478

everfree wrote: post #410

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I find it telling that several currently live privacy networks were mentioned in this comment tree that you can use today, yet you still latch on to the word "eventually" and call the space a scam.

Maybe that was a bit unfair. Perhaps what I should say is that there is too much competition, such that no one can get the traction they need to truly accomplish their goals, with few exceptions.

I don't think too much competition has ever killed a product category. Usually the "few exceptions" end up dominating a market.

Re: Web3 is centralized

#492

Post by usrbinbash » Mon, Jan 03, 2022, 6:29 PM UTC

darawk wrote: post #475

usrbinbash wrote: post #438

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> There is no equivalent on web1. Of course there is. If the service offered is not just access to some data, but things like computational power, access to a game server, food delivered, etc. I put up a payment system, and unless its used there is no access to the asset. What form that payment system has, and what tokens it accepts USD, EUR, BTC, Seashells or Sliced Bread, is completely irrelevant.

All of the web1 equivalents are centralized systems, where the assets in question cannot be traded independently of the central authority. That is the difference.

Every system in a "web3" environment is still hosted on some server or cluster.

And someone, somewhere, has the root pwd for that server. There is still a central authority.

That someone decides if the server is up, what code it runs, and how it interacts with voting, contracts, tokens, etc. on the ledger. The only thing in such an environment that is "dezentralized", is the public ledger (aka. the "Blockchain"), where the current state of the tokens, settings, etc. are stored.

If the people running the service decide that whatever is written in that ledger no longer applies to them, it no longer applies, period.

Re: Web3 is centralized

#493

Post by ca98am79 » Mon, Jan 03, 2022, 7:37 PM UTC

Handshake, to me, is an example of a better version than the current version of the web.

I would rather have a decentralized root zone on a blockchain than a centralized root zone controlled by ICANN.

This fixes a lot of problems, including no need to trust certificate authorities.

Others may not agree and would rather it be centralized and controlled by ICANN. But you can't deny that it is more decentralized to have the root zone on the Handshake blockchain.

Re: Web3 is centralized

#494

Post by saito99 » Tue, Jan 04, 2022, 12:51 AM UTC

tata71 wrote: post #469

saito99 wrote: post #467

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Too bad most big exchanges don't accept Monero for trading since know-your-customer policies won't work when you can't associate a wallet address with someone.

Too bad most big exchanges are being made obsolete by DeFi 2.0 and multi-chain wallets and services.

They'll try to find a way to stay relevant

Re: Web3 is centralized

#495

Post by mattwilsonn888 » Wed, Jan 05, 2022, 6:12 PM UTC

jeroenhd wrote: post #367

mattwilsonn888 wrote: post #343

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think some grassroots web3 people will agree with you, web3 is not simply about blockchain and IPFS would certainly be included in their definition. To answer your question, 'crypto' adds the ability to store valuable data trustlessly. This means any data for which there is profit in manipulating, user accounts, key-stores, accounting (obviously). In practice most of web3 should take place off chain - 'crypto' or b…

Storing user information on be blockchain not only sounds unnecessary, it's also illegal in the EU. I get the advantage of blockchains and such for trading virtual currencies, but I'm still not sure why you'd need a public ledger to accomplish anything new that a standard PGP signature wouldn't already accomplish. Is the idea of web3 to put the entire internet on some kind of blockchain to replace HTTP? Wouldn't that…

> Storing user information on be blockchain not only sounds unnecessary, it's also illegal in the EU.

It's necessary for the most basic of blockchain functions; you cannot transact and have a coherent model of accounts without identifying users on chain, even if its done confidentially. Unless owning coins on a blockchain is illegal in Europe, you'll have to clarify.

The extension of blockchain to store information other than account balance of the native chain is natural - so long as that information has comparable value to coins on the chain and you can justify it having all those properties. It's already massively useful for wrapped assets. If you can figure out how to make a crypto that only requires PGP keys then you've solved a massive problem about storing account balances or other information you would like to take on the properties of data on chain - congratulations.

> Is the idea of web3 to put the entire internet on some kind of blockchain to replace HTTP? Wouldn't that be crazy inefficient?

This comes up a lot. No. No serious, competent person in crypto has ever entertained putting the whole internet on the blockchain despite the being what many a skeptic retort. As I said earlier, as much should be off chain as possible, meaning either web2 or peer to peer access. When blockchains people use are a factor better at scaling this will include more and more data and uses. With current scaling and capital allocation (mostly in the slow, expensive Eth) the only businesses that can justify their existence on chain must offer some sort of monetary interest to their users.

I'm sure you have a lot more questions and well reasoned doubts that many in the crypto space have realized and are working on, I enjoy chatting about this stuff but am going to cut myself off before I go too long. If you wanna chat more you can always DM me.

Re: Web3 is centralized

#496

Post by dimgl » Wed, Jan 05, 2022, 11:59 PM UTC

neuroma wrote: post #72

It's fascinating how on hacker news one typically finds detailed, reasoned and thoughtful comments. However on the topic of crypto and web3 the comments reliably degenerate into partisan tit for tat, consisting mainly of poorly researched, unreasoned sound bytes. It's a pity because I'd love to hear quality thought on the space. My personal view is that crypto and Web3 "are a thing" (Mean Girls) and will continue to…

I don't know; I'm surprised you think this is non-partisan. You should visit /r/buttcoin. These are all valid arguments, IMO, and I share their sentiment. Web3, whatever it is, is looking like a massive mistake.

But yet the money continues to flow in. People who know nothing about technology in general are now investing in companies specializing in this technology. Why? Clearly, there's something there. Or maybe there really isn't. And this is the biggest grift ever seen. All led by ridiculous marketing.

I really do think this is all going to collapse. There's no way this clown car just continues endlessly without some repercussions.

Re: Web3 is centralized

#497

Post by cryptica » Sat, Jan 08, 2022, 4:36 PM UTC

inter_netuser wrote: post #207

cryptica wrote: post #109

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've worked in the crypto space for several years as a software developer and I can confirm that this is true. Most projects have no interest in developing the technology. Some communities will actively go out of their way to suppress innovation. There is a lot of 'busy work' going on with many projects going in circles.

can give an example of innovation suppression? very curious.

Like for example, you work for a company which claims to be working towards certain goals, then when you make some significant progress towards one of the main technical goals as an employee; instead of the project founders being pleased and giving you a bonus and rolling out the new tech to the community, they cancel everything, fire you from your job (or put you in a situation where you are forced to quit) and then they turn the entire community and their social network against you to ensure that you don't succeed outside the company... All against the stated goals of the company/project. True story BTW.