4 ms·

Exactly! And, in addition to that complexity, there are scalability issues that are easier to solve with some amount of centralization. Would you rather build

Exactly! And, in addition to that complexity, there are scalability issues that are easier to solve with some amount of centralization. Would you rather build on a platform where you're paying a well known company or a platform comprised of a bunch of anonymous nodes trying to minimize operating costs? That Filecoin thing is a great example. Yeah, I want to store my mission critical data on a bunch of EoL, consumer grade hard disks that someone is using to participate in the blockchain. /s And no regulation isn't the utopia the crypto enthusiasts are selling. Don't completely unregulated systems typically end up dominated by the richest, most ruthless, least ethical participants?

synctext 5y ago
It is not some amount of centralization. Our experimental university work sees all startups cheat with servers. They still sell it as Web3. If you run the servers, you need to police the service! You simply become Web2 again. It should be self-organising and pure, like Bitcoin. Scientifically Web3 consists of: peer-to-peer technology (e.g. Bittorrent) with a distributed ledger (e.g. Bitcoin) and the social practice of sharing (e.g. Github). This will take 10-15 years more to develop further. The startups are very noisy and are now discovering that doing real "distributed systems" is very hard. They consistently cheat by using central servers. Adversarial Byzantine attacks are unsolved (or require wasteful proof-of-work to yield no performance).
- Joker_vD 5y ago
  > peer-to-peer technology (e.g. Bittorrent) with a distributed ledger (e.g. Bitcoin) and the social practice of sharing (e.g. Github) 2 out of 3 of those things (minus distributed ledger) has been around for about 20 years now. Y'know, The Pirate Bay and others?