4 ms·

> I'm surprised that there is no middle ground - there are either fervent advocates or fervent opposition, and with very few exceptions The middle ground would

> I'm surprised that there is no middle ground - there are either fervent advocates or fervent opposition, and with very few exceptions The middle ground would be people who aren't invested in crypto, but have tried a few dApps and think they can be neat sometimes but maybe are rough around the edges and might be better in a few years. These people don't exist because web3 technologies have nothing appealing to end users, only to investors. This might change eventually, but for now there's literally no reason to use blockchain if you aren't looking to invest or speculate in something.

aunty_helen 5y ago
Non-invested middle ground web3 fanboy here. There’s definitely a lot of potential. Judging a technology based on what the first few applications to materialize is extremely short sighted and has never been a good estimate of its future usage. Personally I dislike full blown crypto zealots and also I dislike the Perl clutching tech crowd. Just remember distributed tech has never been the most efficient way to get something done so if you’re looking at web3 from a purely better faster cheaper perspective then you won’t get it. However, lucky for us, these aren’t the only problems to exist.
- mycall 5y ago
  One dApp (or whatever blockchain application) I would love to see some traction is liquid democracy, from a government POV. The votecoin or adhocracy4 experiments exist but were not even in the right ballpark for a federal voting system that bypasses or changes Congress and constitution at its roots. I can see this huge someday, as zero trust is great and all, but it is a huge effort nobody has really started.
dangoljames 5y ago
Sorry if this seems a bit ranty. I'm kind of a middle ground person, perhaps leaning slightly 'against' rather than 'for', over predominantly environmental concerns. I've distanced myself from crypto since I learned what the chinese were up to, and since china is putting a stop to that now (allegedly?), and the rest of crypto seems to be quietly moving in a PoS direction, recently reintroduced myself. Most of the objections I have, other than the climate concern involve valuation, stability vs. valuation, etc. Because I have some experience in the open source virtual worlds arena, and because 15m square plot of decentraland just sold for over 2 million $US, I decided to make a personal investigation of decentraland and it's relationship to ethereum. I went into this quite optimistic and hopeful, because I enjoy such things. What I found, however, was no cause for joy. Perhaps my expectations were unrealistic. In any case, as I said before elsewhere, they have fallen victim to the touch of Midas: Their various holdings became extremely overvalued in a very short period of time, to that extent where no one else can afford them. When I posed this issue to them directly, the general attitude was 'well, Walmart and Nike can afford us, so...', but zero acknowledgement that their entire value to those corporations is based on the number of product consuming users they can bring to the table. Their self-governance machine, the DAO, is a thing of beauty, in that it could be employed to actually produce an autonomous, self governing organization that embraced everyone on equal terms and let everyone involved behave as the peers they should be in an ideal community; instead, they have pretty well implemented everything bad about today's governments, arriving at a functional oligarchy made up of those with the most land and currency, which they call 'voting power' - and the so called officers of the various supporting and ideally moderating concerns (their foundation, their DAO, and, due to the concept of voting power, their property holders), are all the same people. They do a steady job right now in their discord channel of gaslighting these concerns where ever they are indicated, to the extent that they tossed me out this morning for calling them out on it; I haven't troubled myself to see if they just tossed me out or banned me, because I really don't much care. I do know that their behavior in every respect will alienate users not just to virtual worlds and cryptocurrency, but to the whole endeavor they are labeling 'web3'. DAO or not, this is not The Way.
- FabHK 5y ago
  > DAO or not, this is not The Way. Not sure whether that was on purpose, but Chinese 道 Dào is literally the 'Way' (same syllable as in "Taoism" or "Judo" or "Aikido" etc... :-)
- sureklix 5y ago
  Cool, but this is one data point. Would be good research how autocratic type of coordination convergence (e.g. functional oligarchy in this case) is the case compared to open source? If more then that means DAOs are failing to be a better coordination technology.

aunty_helen 5y ago

Non-invested middle ground web3 fanboy here. There’s definitely a lot of potential. Judging a technology based on what the first few applications to materialize is extremely short sighted and has never been a good estimate of its future usage. Personally I dislike full blown crypto zealots and also I dislike the Perl clutching tech crowd. Just remember distributed tech has never been the most efficient way to get something done so if you’re looking at web3 from a purely better faster cheaper perspective then you won’t get it. However, lucky for us, these aren’t the only problems to exist.

mycall 5y ago
One dApp (or whatever blockchain application) I would love to see some traction is liquid democracy, from a government POV. The votecoin or adhocracy4 experiments exist but were not even in the right ballpark for a federal voting system that bypasses or changes Congress and constitution at its roots. I can see this huge someday, as zero trust is great and all, but it is a huge effort nobody has really started.

dangoljames 5y ago

Sorry if this seems a bit ranty. I'm kind of a middle ground person, perhaps leaning slightly 'against' rather than 'for', over predominantly environmental concerns. I've distanced myself from crypto since I learned what the chinese were up to, and since china is putting a stop to that now (allegedly?), and the rest of crypto seems to be quietly moving in a PoS direction, recently reintroduced myself. Most of the objections I have, other than the climate concern involve valuation, stability vs. valuation, etc. Because I have some experience in the open source virtual worlds arena, and because 15m square plot of decentraland just sold for over 2 million $US, I decided to make a personal investigation of decentraland and it's relationship to ethereum. I went into this quite optimistic and hopeful, because I enjoy such things. What I found, however, was no cause for joy. Perhaps my expectations were unrealistic. In any case, as I said before elsewhere, they have fallen victim to the touch of Midas: Their various holdings became extremely overvalued in a very short period of time, to that extent where no one else can afford them. When I posed this issue to them directly, the general attitude was 'well, Walmart and Nike can afford us, so...', but zero acknowledgement that their entire value to those corporations is based on the number of product consuming users they can bring to the table. Their self-governance machine, the DAO, is a thing of beauty, in that it could be employed to actually produce an autonomous, self governing organization that embraced everyone on equal terms and let everyone involved behave as the peers they should be in an ideal community; instead, they have pretty well implemented everything bad about today's governments, arriving at a functional oligarchy made up of those with the most land and currency, which they call 'voting power' - and the so called officers of the various supporting and ideally moderating concerns (their foundation, their DAO, and, due to the concept of voting power, their property holders), are all the same people. They do a steady job right now in their discord channel of gaslighting these concerns where ever they are indicated, to the extent that they tossed me out this morning for calling them out on it; I haven't troubled myself to see if they just tossed me out or banned me, because I really don't much care. I do know that their behavior in every respect will alienate users not just to virtual worlds and cryptocurrency, but to the whole endeavor they are labeling 'web3'. DAO or not, this is not The Way.

FabHK 5y ago
> DAO or not, this is not The Way. Not sure whether that was on purpose, but Chinese 道 Dào is literally the 'Way' (same syllable as in "Taoism" or "Judo" or "Aikido" etc... :-)
sureklix 5y ago
Cool, but this is one data point. Would be good research how autocratic type of coordination convergence (e.g. functional oligarchy in this case) is the case compared to open source? If more then that means DAOs are failing to be a better coordination technology.