Live data from Hacker News

Web3? I have my DAOts

networked.substack.com

551–560 of 636 posts

Re: Web3? I have my DAOts

#551

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The blockchain facilities standardised transfer across a decentralised medium. I'm not sure how much clearer I can make my point. You could code alternatives to all the use-cases mentioned, but when you have an existing platform on which to interact, why bother? You want the game developers to implement the winery's API?

> The blockchain facilities standardised transfer across a decentralised medium. It hasn't. It standardised the transfer of otherwise meaningless numbers, that's true. In order for your winde order to work, a centralised, trusted party has to verify and accept those numbers, and say that, yes, they represent something meaningful to them. The same goes for every other example. "Want to trade something for an in-game w…

>> The blockchain facilities standardised transfer across a decentralised medium.

>It hasn't. It standardised the transfer of otherwise meaningless numbers, that's true.

Sure, but that alone can have value. The idea being that people have already built entire trading platforms around tokens, fungible or not. Somebody who wants to enable easy trading of some asset (or futures contract or whatever), hoping for improved liquidity, could see using the platforms built for crypto token trading as much easier than trying to build their own exchange. Especially if it is anticipated that physical settlement demands will not be especially common.

To be more concrete: It might be simpler to get your single-vineyard wine futures up and running on crypto than trying to get it listed as a new contract type in a traditional futures exchange.

Now sure, nothing about getting your weird futures contract into some form of widely used exchange requires blockchain technology. It is merely leveraging the existing infrastructure others have already built around crypto.

This is not too dissimilar from the various ways people have found to get say precious metals as listed items on stock exchanges, despite traditional commodity exchanges or brokered OTC trades also existing. Obviously nothing about speculating on (or maintaining market liquidity for) precious metals requires a stock exchange, since we have those other ways of trading. However people have found getting access to the stock trading market to be worthwhile.

Obviously settlement for physical goods is a centralized processes (or possibly a somewhat decentralized process relying on courts and contracts). This is equally true for any exchange, crypto-based or not. The actual order matching process somewhat separate from the settlement process in traditional exchanges too.

I certainly would not argue that similar platforms could be set up not reliant on crypto in any way, and those could be superior (although network effect problem tend to plague attempts to set such things up if any sort of scale is desired). Most crypto stuff is still extremely overhyped, and a lot of interest in crypto seems to stem from crazy speculation, or people trying to avoid their government in some manner. (The latter is not just things like drugs, arm sales, or money laundering. It also includes more innocent reasons like people in countries with failing economies being terrified that their government can just seize the contents of forex accounts, stock exchanges etc, making their attempts to hedge against local economic collapse potentially futile. But governments cannot readily seize crypto wallets the same way, at least not unless you leave your holdings at some exchange.)

Re: Web3? I have my DAOts

#552
post #478
post #343

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What happens if the wine goes bad? Who/what arbitrates in that scenario? Because from the winery's perspective, whoever currently holds that contract owes them money for the wine at a fixed price that was determined and sold in the past. If I hold that contract and have to take delivery of rancid wine instead of fresh wine like I imagined, what's my recourse? Basically how do you ensure the state of the real-world as…

In the case of wine, the real-world version of “going bad” is just that it’s not very good. When you bought the future wine, you were betting that it would be very good wine and you could resell it for more. The winery was selling it to you for “cheap(er)” because you assumed that risk. So for actual wine, right now, you have no recourse: you bought the risk. I don’t think this would be any different with NFT-wine. N…

So the "trustless" system still relies on you to trust the reputation of the winemaker.

What are we actually inventing here?

Re: Web3? I have my DAOts

#553
post #539

Earlier quoted context omitted.

that has been a common problem with tech utopians, and not one I'm personally interested in. Tech doesn't change society for the better automatically, but it can create incentives in the right direction. Are we really saying a world prior to the printing press was better? What about before freely available information online a la wikipedia? No way.

What good incentive does crypto bring? It incentivizes black market tendency and money laundering. Also printing press didn't consume so much resources, for so little gain.

Decentralised records of ownership enforce data portability and user IDs (wallets) that are not controlled by any single actor.

The incentives for centralised databases is to remove interop to create artificial silos and gate users from leaving your service. We’ve gotten to the point where text messaging which is trivial, has no interop.

Crypto flips this on its head. If you build a service using IPFS, ENS and crypto wallets as users, your website is merely a front end for an open source decentralised service. This is not a hypothetical, recently the HicEtNunc NFT market was nuked by its lead developer. The website was open source, the artwork was hosted in IPFS and all the ownership data (NFTs) were on Tezos blockchain, so literally NOTHING was lost. The community quite simply rebuilt the front end in 24 hours or so and everything kept going.

When was the last time you saw anything like that in web2? Never. It was impossible. HicEtNunc now has 10x front ends competing for the space with no clear leader. Web3 is about ownership and portability, things that centralised servers and databases incentivised their owners to lie and cheat about to make into fake moats.

Here is the story - https://www.coindesk.com/tech/2021/11/18/what-hic-et-nuncs-r...

Re: Web3? I have my DAOts

#554
post #173

I think the problem with the current state of Web3 is that it really doesn't seem to solve meaningful, mainstream problems yet. Even the most widely accepted use case which is crypto-currency fails to break out of the theoretical value outlined in the different white papers. I own several crypto-currencies and there hasn't been a single moment in which I thought of buying something with a crypto-currency. I have cryp…

I use crypto on a weekly basis, from renewing domains and web hosting, to accessing loans in 15 seconds without gatekeepers.

what happens if you stop paying your loan?

Re: Web3? I have my DAOts

#555

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Remember, all this stuff is zero-sum. For every winner, there has to be a loser. That's not how it works. Suppose Bitcoin comes into existence and people mine a billion dollars worth of it. They now have a billion dollars worth of Bitcoin. Nobody else has lost anything. If they sell the Bitcoin and someone else buys it, the buyer hasn't lost anything. They had $100 worth of cash and now they have $100 worth of Bitc…

The point is that for every dollar someone takes out of the crypto eco-system someone else has to put one in. With miners taking their own cut that means the game is actually negative sum for normal people trading in crypto currencies.

Same for most things. Guy grow potatoes sells some and uses the money to buy stuff. For every dollar he takes out of his potato ecosystem someone has to put one in. Just how these things are.

Re: Web3? I have my DAOts

#556
post #470
post #390

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, the basic problem is ownership rights over physical objects can't be enforced without coercive power, but blockchains and smart contracts can't use coercive power, therefore they would have to rely on an external entity to enforce such rights. But then the system is no longer "trustless", "permissionless", or "censorship-resistant", and therefore we have none of the supposed benefits of blockchains but we do have…

What if they could have that power? Imagine something like Robocop hooked up to the EVM, if you put your RealID in the escrow contract and then the ubiquitous camera network is unable to verify that you honored the transaction, well then you have 15 seconds to comply…

Sure, but if you had a sufficiently powerful robot you could also circumvent traditional means of enforcing ownership and contracts.

Re: Web3? I have my DAOts

#557

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I keep hearing this argument but I really don't buy it, sorry. I think that over time these other chains are also going to naturally decentralize, at least in the case of Solana the primary barrier of entry is hardware. I think that actually having a product that works today is more important than a platform that hasn't been scalable since inception. Maybe ETH 2.0 will release sometime and all the ongoing scalability…

ETH already scales with L2 while remaining the most decentralized and secure

Yeah, let me just lock up my ETH for a week so I can move it to Arbitrum and only have to pay $25 a transaction instead of $100.

Re: Web3? I have my DAOts

#558

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That green energy would have been used by someone else if BTC didn't use it. Put another way, if there had been one energy customer, X, instead of BTC + X, and availability of green energy was X + BTC/2, then fuelling BTC required generation of non-renewable energy.

That's not how markets work. Maybe on short term. If the demand for green energy is increasing due to Bitcoin, the production will also increase because it will drive profits of green energy producers.

> If the demand for green energy is increasing due to Bitcoin

I would much rather that the demand for green energy increase due to a desire to transition away from other energy sources.

If the demand for energy is increasing and being met with green energy without removing the other sources of energy, that's not entirely a win in my book.

Re: Web3? I have my DAOts

#559

Earlier quoted context omitted.

1) The rules about the 21Million which is the only thing that matters here can't be changed. 2) Again there is a reason why Bitcoin Cash is a fraction of BTCs value it's not the same. 3) Everything can be manipulated. You go and see how Soros did that in the 90es. But again that's not the measurement here. It can't be changed. It's been a house waiting to collapse for 12 years now. Maybe you should ask yourself what…

The rules about the 21Million which is the only thing that matters here can't be changed. What would stop it being changed? It's been a house waiting to collapse for 12 years now. Tether has only been trading since 2015 and only prominent the last few years. Other cryptocurrencies have seen multiple bubbles and collapses. The thing that would convince me personally is that all the get-rich-quick marks and scammers le…

Why don't you tell me first what would make it possible since you seem to be privy to information no one else is. How are you going to change that?

Re: Web3? I have my DAOts

#560

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You are answering your own question by asking the wrong one. This is only a problem if it's in fact enforcable. There are many ways to solve the stealing among others multisig.

you're not answering the question though. the only thing the system can do is ask more and more from their users, but there is no way to know if the transaction is good: if it looks good, it is good. so it can't enforce anything on its own. a CC payment can look good, but it can be reversed because there other other channels, outside of the CC circuit, to prove those transactions are to be considered fraudulent. Ther…

I have answered it and again you are answering it ex. here:

"A CC payment can look good, but it can be reversed because there other other channels, outside of the CC circuit, to prove those transactions are to be considered fraudulent.

There is no such mechanism in the crypto space, so basically they are good unless you have an issue that can't be solved by the chain itself."

This is a feature NOT a bug. It comes with it's own consequences of course but that's exactly what makes it enforceable just like physics enforce its laws.

Post reply on HN