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

But, aren't you folks web2?

nadh.in

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 191 posts

Re: But, aren't you folks web2?

#51

Post by andai »

jeswin wrote: post #34

This is not a commentary on the article itself - I don't have an opinion on it. Most people who have experienced the pre-2000s web can tell what Web 2.0 was. It was a cultural shift in how apps were designed and used, and while the term was vague you could actually tell the difference as a user (eg: encyclopedias v/s wikis). At that point people were similarly critical of the term Web 2.0, and they weren't entirely w…

Web 3.0 (Semantic Web) already failed a decade ago. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Web_3.0

So it annoys me that this new, unrelated thing has stolen its name.

Though you it could certainly be argued that due to failing it didn't deserve a major version number.

Re: But, aren't you folks web2?

#52

Post by jeswin »

andai wrote: post #51
jeswin wrote: post #34

This is not a commentary on the article itself - I don't have an opinion on it. Most people who have experienced the pre-2000s web can tell what Web 2.0 was. It was a cultural shift in how apps were designed and used, and while the term was vague you could actually tell the difference as a user (eg: encyclopedias v/s wikis). At that point people were similarly critical of the term Web 2.0, and they weren't entirely w…

Web 3.0 (Semantic Web) already failed a decade ago. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Web_3.0 So it annoys me that this new, unrelated thing has stolen its name. Though you it could certainly be argued that due to failing it didn't deserve a major version number.

Fair point. I'm referring to whatever is implied by Web 3.0 today, discounting the misappropriation of the item.

Re: But, aren't you folks web2?

#53

Post by kubb »

I'm way ahead of you people, I'm already on web4. web4 is a revolutionary technological paradigm that will completely change not only people's use of technology, but entire societies, unlock better forms of governance and agriculture and make human dignity and basic income an immutable right.

Join me in creating tomorrow.

Re: But, aren't you folks web2?

#54

Post by chrisco255 »

colesantiago wrote: post #24

If there is anything you take from web3 or whatever is that it is a scam. For decades there is no use case whatsoever and it's just full of grifters trying to get rich. I would like to challenge these grifters to name a legitimate, functional and valid use case that isn't speculation based or a scam that is part of web3.

ENS (Ethereum Name Service), Filecoin and Arweave decentralized, long term, content addressed data storage, POAP (Proof of Attendance Protocol), Sign In With Ethereum (using ETH public key for auth), USDC (digital USD, redeemable by a U.S. regulated bank, tradeable and programmable in smart contracts), zero knowledge strategy gaming like Dark Forest (https://zkga.me/), etc etc.

It's a very new space so there is a Cambrian explosion of ideas. I get that it's very hard to sift through and as an outside observer it's easy to focus on the failed evolutionary paths, but in situations like these, it will be only obvious in hindsight which applications turned out to be most useful to people. Even "speculative" or financial use cases are valid. Speculation is an important part about how markets function.

Re: But, aren't you folks web2?

#55

Post by varjag »

jeswin wrote: post #34

This is not a commentary on the article itself - I don't have an opinion on it. Most people who have experienced the pre-2000s web can tell what Web 2.0 was. It was a cultural shift in how apps were designed and used, and while the term was vague you could actually tell the difference as a user (eg: encyclopedias v/s wikis). At that point people were similarly critical of the term Web 2.0, and they weren't entirely w…

The technical foundation of Web 2.0 was simple: interactivity afforded by XMLHttpRequest. I have to see one yet to formulate what the hell Web 3.0 is under the hood, some definition a la "web but on blockchain" doesn't have enough meat on the bones.

Re: But, aren't you folks web2?

#56

Post by [deleted] »

o_m wrote: post #38
k__ wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When I graduated, mobile was the big thing. That's old now. So, what to do to make a name for you? What big new field is there where you don't have to compete with people that have 10 times the experience than you? Independently of what you think web3 might solve or doesn't solve, it's still just programming. Someone learning cryptography and coding will get a job in other places.

React/javascript is still a moving target, so a junior will easily catch up with someone with 10 times more experience

[deleted]

Re: But, aren't you folks web2?

#57

Post by ben_w »

o_m wrote: post #38
k__ wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When I graduated, mobile was the big thing. That's old now. So, what to do to make a name for you? What big new field is there where you don't have to compete with people that have 10 times the experience than you? Independently of what you think web3 might solve or doesn't solve, it's still just programming. Someone learning cryptography and coding will get a job in other places.

React/javascript is still a moving target, so a junior will easily catch up with someone with 10 times more experience

I'm beginning to feel the same about mobile, though I think the rate of change in iOS is at least slower than the memes[0] about JS-framework-of-the-week.

I started iOS development with ObjC with manual reference counting; saw big and helpful changes with literal syntax and subscripting, ARC, and storyboards; I switched to Swift when it got OK; and now everyone seems to be going "storyboards and MVC are lame grandpa ways of doing things, let's use reactive asynchronous stuff everywhere!"

I'm starting to feel old, and it's not just the half dozen individual grey hairs.

[0] in the original sense of the word

Re: But, aren't you folks web2?

#58

Post by nileshtrivedi »

colesantiago wrote: post #50
World177 wrote: post #21

There are really interesting use cases of "Web3" As an example, consider domains. Ethereum Name Service domains are currently one of the most popular. If you use these domains, you instantly have access to the 10,000,000 people using MetaMask, and the 50,000,000 people using Brave Browser. They're actually very powerful when considering the centralization of normal domains. They allow you to create decentralized doma…

How do you deal with domain squatting or trademark violation? The current system does this well because of identity and web3 doesn't have any answer to this. Also I can host my own DNS server with my own domain name all decentralised without crypto scamming.

Some challenges arising out of human-meaningful names that any registry of names needs to tackle:

- Inclusivity for future generations. Early adopters should not crowd out late adopters of all the desirable names

- Community ownership or geographical indications or false advertising (eg: DarjeelingTea.com should only be owned collectively by farmers in that particular region)

- Prevention of abuse or trademark violations (eg: Nestly should be able to sue and win the case on merit against somebody who registers nestlekillsbabies.com)

Re: But, aren't you folks web2?

#59

Post by RamblingCTO »

varjag wrote: post #55
jeswin wrote: post #34

This is not a commentary on the article itself - I don't have an opinion on it. Most people who have experienced the pre-2000s web can tell what Web 2.0 was. It was a cultural shift in how apps were designed and used, and while the term was vague you could actually tell the difference as a user (eg: encyclopedias v/s wikis). At that point people were similarly critical of the term Web 2.0, and they weren't entirely w…

The technical foundation of Web 2.0 was simple: interactivity afforded by XMLHttpRequest. I have to see one yet to formulate what the hell Web 3.0 is under the hood, some definition a la "web but on blockchain" doesn't have enough meat on the bones.

Just wanted to say that. Web 1.0 was plain HTML. Web 2.0 brought interactiveness via AJAX. It's quite simple actually.

Re: But, aren't you folks web2?

#60

Post by nathias »

ekidd wrote: post #46
nathias wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Quoted post unavailable.

At this point, web3 is becoming strongly associated with high-profile scams, many of them likely criminal. It's also associated with people who won't stop talking about how the blockchain will make your teeth whiter, or something equally unlikely. Blockchains are just decentralized Merkle trees. Merkle trees are a cool trick (look at git!). But the cost of decentralizing them, Bitcoin-style, has been massive carbon e…

No post body was provided.
Post reply on HN