[HN Gopher] Web3? I have my DAOts
___________________________________________________________________
Web3? I have my DAOts
Author : jaypinho
Score : 37 points
Date : 2021-12-06 21:35 UTC (1 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (networked.substack.com)
(TXT) w3m dump (networked.substack.com)
| daoismyname wrote:
| that Web2 VS Web3 schema pretty much summarize what's wrong with
| the new internet based on brand identities instead of technical
| merits.
|
| A brief rebuttal:
|
| - Twitter can censor any account or Tweet: yes, but Twitter is
| not the web, you can host your own tweets, even for free.
|
| - Web3 tweets are better because decentralized: translations ->
| your thought are going to be forever visible to everybody and not
| even the author will be able to remove them. Of course any of
| those new shiny web3 logs can fail and everything can disappear
| with them.
|
| - Payment services may decide to not allow payments: Web3
| payments can do the same. There is nothing that forces me to
| accept a payment and if that was true, that would be a problem. I
| __do want__ to refuse payments from criminals and I do wanna know
| if someone is.
|
| - servers for gig economy may go down. web3 servers can go down
| as well, they are made of hardware and maintained by people too.
| If, for example, Uber can't keep their servers running despite
| their profits depend on them, imagine what would happen if Uber
| was running on someone else's node who DGAF if they lose money or
| not...
|
| Now imagine what would happen to me, a completely unknown
| anonymous individual, with no power.
|
| What happens if something goes wrong and "my income is affected"?
|
| Who is responsible?
|
| Who can I sue in case the SLA in the agreement haven't been
| guaranteed?
|
| Will "the decentralized network of 1000s of computers" reimburse
| me?
| whoisjuan wrote:
| 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 crypto-currencies
| because I'm speculating in their asset class value, not
| necessarily because I'm betting on their utility.
|
| Now, I know that crypto coins are indeed used in real
| service/product transactions, but I think there's a difference
| between the present economical use of cryptos and its potential
| mainstream use where cryptos can effectively replace fiat
| currencies in super wide economic settings.
|
| I believe that Web3 would happen but I honestly can't see a clear
| trajectory for Cryptos, NFTs, DAOs etc to become effective
| instruments that replace existing Web2 instruments.
|
| In fact the reason why everything in Web3 feels like BS right now
| is because everything in this space uses Web2 distribution.
| People promoting NFTs on Twitter feels a little bit like someone
| faxing you a webpage. Owning the rights to a random JPEG is
| something that feels too abstracted from the present Web2 mental
| model and value proposition.
| Uehreka wrote:
| I said this in another comment on this post, but check out ENS.
| I've been a blockchain skeptic for a long time (and still am
| about art NFTs and most other things) but the idea of "SSO
| without a company attached" feels like something the mainstream
| public actually does want (think of all the negative public
| sentiment around big tech companies harvesting data and the
| grudging acceptance people have of their dependence on FB and
| Google for identity and easy sign-in). It's also something that
| requires blockchain and can't be done without a "decentralized
| consensus" about who owns what username (this is how you get
| around relying on a particular company). And ENS works now,
| it's the kind of thing you could just go ahead and add to a web
| app you're working on without having to wait for "the tech to
| arrive" or anything.
|
| Again, I'm still skeptical about most of this stuff, but this
| one thing seems like a pretty good and somewhat practical idea.
| carlosdp wrote:
| > The root node [under which all ENS domains are registered] is
| presently owned by a multisig contract, with keys held by
| trustworthy individuals in the Ethereum community.
|
| For what it's worth, this is changing as we speak. ENS recently
| had a very successful launch of a DAO [1] which will soon be in
| control of these contracts, therefore making it fully
| decentralized. It's also already impossible for anyone (not even
| the root holder, be it mult-sig or DAO) to revoke your ENS
| registration.
|
| Also, NBA Top Shot is a _very_ cherry-picked example. I 'm not
| even sure I'd classify those as NFTs right now, given they are
| completely separated from the broader ecosystem and not yet
| interoperable at all.
|
| [1]
| https://ens.mirror.xyz/5cGl-Y37aTxtokdWk21qlULmE1aSM_NuX9fst...
| laurex wrote:
| There's a kool-aide concern here, which is: to play in the web3
| world, you seem to need to have either a LOT of capital that is
| fine to lose or have access to this small community. The
| communities I've joined are indistinguishable from Twitch
| communities where there's a lot of bro high-fives and mutual
| appreciation for the riches being invented, not much concern for
| what the side effects might be. And because there's an advantage
| in staking, people who can afford to just leave money in these
| volatile currencies get richer. Not saying this is really any
| different than the world in general, but it seems like web3
| advocates paint a picture of "disruption" that feels more like
| "entrenchment" from an economic vantage.
| TrackerFF wrote:
| RE: Censorship
|
| You often see advocates of decentralization hail networks for
| being pro-immutability, battling censorship.
|
| How does it deal with data you absolutely do _NOT_ want to be
| shared and propagated around? I'm talking about things like CP,
| terrorist media, fake news, scams/frauds, and what not.
| ccamrobertson wrote:
| If you view 'decentralization' as a bucket of technologies
| underpinned by cryptographic primitives and blockchains, it
| doesn't.
|
| This is similar to other technologies like cash, paper, and
| computers* which also don't, as technological phenomena,
| implicitly include censorship as a feature.
|
| *it looks like consumer computing is moving away from general
| 'free' computing to ASICs from folks like Apple which likely
| will include built-in censorship features moving forward.
| etaioinshrdlu wrote:
| Crypto proponents are in favor of there being no technical
| restrictions that prevent such content being posted.
|
| An interesting possibility is that illegal content gets
| permanently inserted into a blockchain, which could make
| running, for example, an ethereum node very illegal.
| api wrote:
| > An interesting possibility is that illegal content gets
| permanently inserted into a blockchain, which could make
| running, for example, an ethereum node very illegal.
|
| I've heard this called a "pee in the pool attack."
|
| Block chains like Ethereum and Bitcoin have one intrinsic
| defense: they don't support very large data objects. So that
| makes inserting CP problematic. But someone determined enough
| and willing to spend money could insert a really horrible
| image as a series of transactions.
| thebean11 wrote:
| At that point you'd need additional data (which
| transactions) and software in order to stitch things back
| together, at which point is it the (disjointed, seemingly
| random) data that's illegal, or the instruction set that
| allows you to assemble it into something illegal?
| adamrezich wrote:
| has there been a documented case of this happening yet? one
| would think that there _must_ have been, at some point, by
| now. but then I suppose if someone were to make a program
| that accesses intentionally-inserted distributed immutable
| data in a blockchain and reconstructs an illegal file
| (probably an image), then I suppose that executable or
| source repository itself would then be taken down by
| authorities and its author(s) prosecuted. but to my
| knowledge, this hasn 't actually happened yet...
| wildbook wrote:
| How about cases where there's not much data involved but
| it's still questionable whether or not the data is legal to
| share?
|
| Leaked encryption keys for example come to mind, but I'm
| sure there's other examples.
| jedimastert wrote:
| I think if you look at the current decentralized options,
| especially Tor, the community has already made these decisions.
| jeroenhd wrote:
| In most cases, the answer is simple: you don't.
|
| For example, IPFS "solves" this by allowing requests for
| takedowns per gateway. The upside of IPFS is that you can go
| after every host, the downside is that everyone knows what
| content you visit. The network still propagates the illegal
| content, so you end up with a witch hunt.
|
| It's probably a good thing paedophiles haven't widely
| discovered IPFS+TOR.
| GrayShade wrote:
| How are they dealt with today? I haven't followed the
| blockchain tend, but IIRC there were programs that could encode
| arbitrary data into the blockchain history. What happens if
| someone puts CP in there?
| knownjorbist wrote:
| Aside from the usual litany of talking points from the last
| decade that everyone is well aware of, this person is missing the
| forest for the trees when discussing "composability". Nevermind
| that this seems to be starting from their priors and working
| backwards.
|
| Here's a much more level-headed(and detailed) analysis of what is
| interesting, and not-so-interesting, about "web3":
|
| https://www.psl.com/feed-posts/web3-engineer-take
| jaypinho wrote:
| Spent weeks investigating the mania around web3 and regret to say
| it does not live up to the hype.
| theplumber wrote:
| I think it depends much of expectations. It actually exceeded
| my expectations. I recently built a small and useless program
| in solidity and deployed it within few hours. It's definitely
| better than what we had available years ago (i.e. on bitcoin
| platform) and I see a future for it. I think it has chances to
| survive in this age of censorship and surveillance.
|
| Something that really surprised me was the signing/metamask
| integration(a kind of webauthn). I would definitely use that to
| login into various websites instead of the invasive
| facebook/google login plugins we see all over the web. There is
| even something akin to oauth2 but without the requirement to
| have "developer keys".
| justicezyx wrote:
| Don't you need to pay someone to deploy the program?
| lukeramsden wrote:
| On the testnet you can get free ETH to deploy contract(s).
| TigeriusKirk wrote:
| Or run your own private chain/node for trying things out.
|
| Recently I've been working at converting an existing web
| business to web3 (at least my interpretation of web3),
| with the goal of making it all decentralized. My
| impression at this point is that it's mostly possible but
| not all that practical.
|
| It might make more sense if I reimagine what the business
| _is_ , which is part of my exploration here.
| theplumber wrote:
| ETH is expensive but there are other "cheaper" blockchains
| compatible with ETH whose "gas" price is negligible. You
| can also deploy for free on the "testnet"
| serverholic wrote:
| "Sign-In with Ethereum" will be huge. I purposefully avoid
| "Sign-in with Google" because putting too much power in a
| centralized authority terrifies me.
|
| I'd much rather have the convenience of "Sign-In with X" but
| backed by something I have control over.
| aditya wrote:
| this already exists, just not widely deployed on web2.
| 'Connect Wallet'.
| Sohcahtoa82 wrote:
| What's the recovery if your private Ethereum key gets
| deleted, or worse, stolen?
|
| If you're signing in via some other 3rd party, you can
| change your password.
|
| I'm just trying to think of how "Sign in with Ethereum"
| would work if you're trying to get your technophobic
| grandma that clicks on phishing links and responds to the
| County Password Inspectors [0] when they call to use it.
|
| [0] https://www.smbc-comics.com/comic/2012-02-20
| knownjorbist wrote:
| Social Recovery is one of a couple methods people have
| proposed:
|
| https://vitalik.ca/general/2021/01/11/recovery.html
| yepthatsreality wrote:
| Like OpenID?
| theplumber wrote:
| OpenID is a closed system both to the end-user and the
| website owner based on secrets(`state` `code`, developer
| keys) from identity providers(google/facebook) not
| cryptography.
| Uehreka wrote:
| I'm a long time blockchain skeptic (check my comment
| history) but I recently came around on the SSO stuff and
| can vouch for it enough to say the magic words: it is in
| fact a novel thing that cannot be done without blockchain
| using pre-existing crypto or auth tech.
|
| The reason is: With private key auth alone, you don't
| have identity, just a non-human readable public key, and
| no universally known exclusive association with a
| particular username. With OpenID or WebAuthn or any of
| that, you would still need a company or org to keep a
| centralized database of everyone's credentials and user
| info. With Blockchain you don't: As long as the Ethereum
| blockchain keeps going, your info (username:
| "johndoe.eth" public_key: "420abc" avatar: "some HTTP or
| IPFS url") will stay stored. This is the exact precise
| thing blockchains are unusually good at doing, and given
| how much people these days are hating on big tech
| companies managing their identities and harvesting data
| in the process, "SSO with no company attached" seems like
| a thing people actually want.
|
| I'm still highly skeptical of art NFTs and crypto as
| currency and lots of other blockchain stuff, but in this
| one case they've won me over. This seems legit.
| [deleted]
| api wrote:
| IMHO this could be the "killer app" and is something I
| might actually use if it got sufficient traction and
| support.
|
| OpenID gives a few organizations like Google, Okta, and
| Microsoft "root on the entire world." It terrifies me.
| knownjorbist wrote:
| A key "ah-ha" moment for me was realizing that your
| wallet is your login on every dApp that's ever existed or
| ever will exist. It's pseudonymous and developers sort of
| get various things for free out of it as a
| result(payments, authorization, authentication)
| Uehreka wrote:
| > I think it depends much of expectations.
|
| Agreed (and I agree that ENS and the SSO stuff looks
| interesting). The problem here is that the crypto community
| are the ones setting the high expectations.
| k__ wrote:
| I spent months investigating the mania around web3 and am glad
| to say it lived up to the hype.
|
| Even if decentralization and payment protocols only deliver on
| 10% of their promises, that's a game changer.
| stolenmerch wrote:
| I really don't think that Mona Lisa example is correct. Maybe I
| misunderstand NFTs, but wouldn't it be more like a printmaker who
| can make as many copies as desired, but the museum sells
| something like the Artist's Proof and documents the sale in an
| official newsletter that goes out to all members? Yes, everyone
| else has a print or a poster version, but only one buyer has the
| Artist's Proof and can prove its provenance. Not a perfect
| analogy, but closer in my opinion.
| Sohcahtoa82 wrote:
| NFTs don't necessarily represent ownership of the underlying
| asset.
|
| They're like minting a commemorative coin celebrating the
| asset, and only minting a single coin. The coin does not
| represent ownership of the asset. It's just...a coin. A token.
| Supposedly, the uniqueness gives it value, but if I decide to
| record a single fart, that fart is unique, but the uniqueness
| does not inherently create value.
|
| An NFT for the Mona Lisa caries no benefits or rights, other
| than saying "I own the NFT for the Mona Lisa". It's inherently
| worthless, with a supposed value being created from absolutely
| nothing.
|
| Anyone buying NFTs either doesn't know what they're actually
| paying for, or thinks they're going to be able to find a
| greater fool who will eventually be willing to pay more.
| stolenmerch wrote:
| Right, and that's why the physical art analogy breaks down.
| Was just trying to come up with a slightly better physical
| art analogy. Copies are possible, forgeries are possible, and
| provenance is a real challenge. However with NFTs it all
| takes an abusive amount of electricity.
| jimkleiber wrote:
| I like the idea of them being a commemorative coin. The
| analogy I've been using is that NFTs are like signatures.
| There may be a famous photo of Elvis that anyone can print,
| however, if someone had that photo printed and
| authentically signed by Elvis, it could be worth a lot more
| money, if people want to have the signature. If Elvis
| signed 500,000 of that same photo, the signature may not be
| worth much.
|
| Perhaps in the future if NFTs get some sort of legal
| backing and therefore more enforced property rights, maybe
| it'll be different, however I think the analogy works well
| for now.
|
| Thoughts?
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2021-12-06 23:00 UTC)