21 ms·

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 u

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 can 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.

dannyw 5y ago
I use crypto on a weekly basis, from renewing domains and web hosting, to accessing loans in 15 seconds without gatekeepers.
- peoplefromibiza 5y ago
  what happens if you stop paying your loan?
Uehreka 5y ago
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.
- clpm4j 5y ago
  I think blockchain SSO could be cool, but do you really think "the mainstream public actually does want" this? The negative public sentiment of big tech is coming from news platforms. As far as I can tell, hundreds of millions of people (e.g. the mainstream public) are using TikTok, Instagram, Snap, etc every single day. I've also never heard of any significant negativity towards Gmail for SSO (aside from my nerd engineer friends, and even among them a minority).
- pavlov 5y ago
  The mainstream public doesn't want their identity attached to a private key that they can lose. And if you're letting someone else store the key, then it's just another form of "Login with X".
  - delaaxe 5y ago
    Unless the 'someone else' is a multisig consisting of a mixture of friends & relatives, instutitions and hardware devices.
    - uh_uh 5y ago
      And this is something that could power reversible transactions as well which I think is a current, but solvable problem of all crypto platforms. What you are proposing is actually a lot better than the tech we have now. If I ever lose my Google login and their customer service does not want to deal with me then honestly, I'm not sure what I'd do. I'd rather trust my friends and family to help me out than FAANG.
    - pavlov 5y ago
      An exciting new set of attack vectors and failure points foisted on people who mostly can’t understand what a safe URL looks like. When my partner clicks on a phishing link, not only are they exposing themselves but potentially also my identity in this multisig world.
    - _jal 5y ago
      And those institutions where everyone knows you go to register and hardware devices everyone trusts don't exist, so you're back to > doesn't seem to solve meaningful, mainstream problems yet
gfodor 5y ago
Even if nothing else pops out, it’s a huge error to point to illegal activity as some kind of bad, irrelevant use case. That smuggles in an assumption that lawbreakers are universally evil. There have been plenty of periods in history where those enforcing the law in a given country were the oppressors, and the resistant lawbreakers the innocent. It’s worth considering what the value proposition of crypto looks like if you were to find yourself living under an illegitimate authority. It may be marginal if the authority can stop it, but the more illegal activity we see in crypto the stronger the belief we should hold that it will be hard to suppress.
- Daishiman 5y ago
  Yes, but you generally can't build a business on top of an illegal industry that's closely scrutinized by law enforcement. Already law enforcement agencies are campaigning hard against ransomware, and central banks and tax agencies investigating how people are using cryptocurrencies to launder money. It doesn't mean it doesn't have value; it's just that the real expected value can't be expected to have legitimate businesses on top.
  - gfodor 5y ago
    Certainly. But if one is going to argue about the value proposition of Web3, it may not be insane to postulate that in the future a large % of the world will live under regimes where the ability to interact with others illegally will be a strong value prop. (Not just financially, but in terms of speech, etc.)
- daoismyname 5y ago
  > It’s worth considering what the value proposition of crypto looks like if you were to find yourself living under an illegitimate authority The cables where communications pass through are protected by armies If crypto eventually could pose a threat to those illegitimate authorities, they would give orders to cut the cables and games would be over. they could also trace them back to your house.
  - 5y ago
iskander 5y ago
>I own several crypto-currencies and there hasn't been a single moment in which I thought of buying something with a crypto-currency. This is entirely personal and subjective, but I prefer the user experience of Aave and Yearn to traditional banking with e.g. Chase. I also would way rather make large purchases with crypto (e.g. down payment on a house) compared with wiring money.
- zepto 5y ago
  Why is ‘wiring’ so bad from your point of view?
  - kwertyoowiyop 5y ago
    Indeed. I’ll gladly pay $20 to have a professional human in the loop when I transfer the down payment on a house.
    - arcticbull 5y ago
      Wires are often free. My bank (HSBC) charges me nothing for domestic wires, my brokerage (IBKR) charges me nothing for domestic wires, Schwab charges nothing for domestic wires, neither does Fidelity, USAA or Ally - even FTX charges nothing for domestic wires - even though moving USDC-ETH out of FTX and into your wallet costs $25.
      - bryik 5y ago
        > Wires are often free. Do you have a citation for this? The articles I found online suggest fees are almost universal, with only a single bank (Fidelity) offering true $0 wire transfer fees to all customers [0]. 0 - https://www.nerdwallet.com/article/banking/wire-transfers-what-banks-charge https://www.nerdwallet.com/article/banking/wire-transfers-wh...
        arcticbull 5y ago
        Here's references, although it looks like Ally and USAA have started charging fees since I looked. HSBC offer free wires for Premier customers. [1] IBKR offers the first domestic wire per month free, subsequent $10. [2] Schwab also offers 1 free per month for qualified customers. [3] Fidelity offers free wires. [4] FTX offers free wires ("We are not currently charging for wire deposits or withdrawals.") [5] Chase Premier Plus and Sapphire checking do not charge wire fees. [6] TD Bank offers 1 free wire transfer per statement cycle. [7] Citigold accounts offer free wires. [8] CIT Bank depending on balance. [9] They're not always free, to be sure - most of the low-end accounts charge for them, but then, those low-end accounts charge for practically everything. That said, TD Bank, Fidelity, Schwab, IBKR all offer at least 1 free wire per month for all customers. If you have any meaningful balances or monthly income, you shouldn't ever pay for wires. Every retail bank offers free wires for qualifying customers to the best of my knowledge. [1] https://www.us.hsbc.com/content/dam/hsbc/us/docs/pdf/deposit-terms-and-charges/hsbc_premier_tcs.pdf https://www.us.hsbc.com/content/dam/hsbc/us/docs/pdf/deposit... p.3 [2] https://www.interactivebrokers.com/en/index.php?f=14718 https://www.interactivebrokers.com/en/index.php?f=14718 [3] https://www.schwab.com/legal/schwab-pricing-guide-for-individual-investors https://www.schwab.com/legal/schwab-pricing-guide-for-indivi... [4] https://www.fidelity.com/customer-service/choose-eft-or-bank-wire https://www.fidelity.com/customer-service/choose-eft-or-bank... [5] https://help.ftx.us/hc/en-us/articles/360043579273-Fees https://help.ftx.us/hc/en-us/articles/360043579273-Fees [6] https://www.chase.com/content/dam/chase-ux/documents/personal/checking/ABSF-en.pdf https://www.chase.com/content/dam/chase-ux/documents/persona... [7] https://www.feeds.td.com/en/document/oao/pdf/1_fees.pdf https://www.feeds.td.com/en/document/oao/pdf/1_fees.pdf [8] https://online.citi.com/US/JRS/pands/detail.do?ID=WireTransfers https://online.citi.com/US/JRS/pands/detail.do?ID=WireTransf... [9] https://www.cit.com/cit-bank/resources/schedule-of-fees https://www.cit.com/cit-bank/resources/schedule-of-fees
EGreg 5y ago
We are underfunded but we are building software to solve meaningful problems with Web3: https://intercoin.org/applications https://intercoin.org/applications https://intercoin.org/presentation.pdf https://intercoin.org/presentation.pdf kind of explains what needs to be fixed in the space. I’d tove to get your feedback
platz 5y ago
NFT's don't grant you any rights of ownership of JPEGs
- whoisjuan 5y ago
  They don't but that’s how people interpret NFTs. They think of NFTs as buying an asset that demonstrates authentic ownership of media. NFTs conceptual value doesn’t map to anything that seems remotely valuable at present moment. There’s no mental model for owning this inmaterial thing that is pegged to a digital file that can be duplicated infinitely without your approval.
  - ShamelessC 5y ago
    > There’s no mental model for owning this inmaterial thing that is pegged to a digital file that can be duplicated infinitely without your approval. We have been dealing with this since the dawn of Napster. I'm pretty sure people understand ownership of digital creations and the ease with which they can be duplicated/pirated.
  - zepto 5y ago
    > that’s how people interpret NFTs Almost no ‘people’ interpret NFTs this way. > There’s no mental model for owning this inmaterial thing that is pegged to a digital file that can be duplicated infinitely without your approval. There is no mental model because there is no ownership.

dannyw 5y ago

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

peoplefromibiza 5y ago
what happens if you stop paying your loan?

Uehreka 5y ago

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.

clpm4j 5y ago
I think blockchain SSO could be cool, but do you really think "the mainstream public actually does want" this? The negative public sentiment of big tech is coming from news platforms. As far as I can tell, hundreds of millions of people (e.g. the mainstream public) are using TikTok, Instagram, Snap, etc every single day. I've also never heard of any significant negativity towards Gmail for SSO (aside from my nerd engineer friends, and even among them a minority).
pavlov 5y ago
The mainstream public doesn't want their identity attached to a private key that they can lose. And if you're letting someone else store the key, then it's just another form of "Login with X".
- delaaxe 5y ago
  Unless the 'someone else' is a multisig consisting of a mixture of friends & relatives, instutitions and hardware devices.
  - uh_uh 5y ago
    And this is something that could power reversible transactions as well which I think is a current, but solvable problem of all crypto platforms. What you are proposing is actually a lot better than the tech we have now. If I ever lose my Google login and their customer service does not want to deal with me then honestly, I'm not sure what I'd do. I'd rather trust my friends and family to help me out than FAANG.
  - pavlov 5y ago
    An exciting new set of attack vectors and failure points foisted on people who mostly can’t understand what a safe URL looks like. When my partner clicks on a phishing link, not only are they exposing themselves but potentially also my identity in this multisig world.
  - _jal 5y ago
    And those institutions where everyone knows you go to register and hardware devices everyone trusts don't exist, so you're back to > doesn't seem to solve meaningful, mainstream problems yet

gfodor 5y ago

Even if nothing else pops out, it’s a huge error to point to illegal activity as some kind of bad, irrelevant use case. That smuggles in an assumption that lawbreakers are universally evil. There have been plenty of periods in history where those enforcing the law in a given country were the oppressors, and the resistant lawbreakers the innocent. It’s worth considering what the value proposition of crypto looks like if you were to find yourself living under an illegitimate authority. It may be marginal if the authority can stop it, but the more illegal activity we see in crypto the stronger the belief we should hold that it will be hard to suppress.

Daishiman 5y ago
Yes, but you generally can't build a business on top of an illegal industry that's closely scrutinized by law enforcement. Already law enforcement agencies are campaigning hard against ransomware, and central banks and tax agencies investigating how people are using cryptocurrencies to launder money. It doesn't mean it doesn't have value; it's just that the real expected value can't be expected to have legitimate businesses on top.
- gfodor 5y ago
  Certainly. But if one is going to argue about the value proposition of Web3, it may not be insane to postulate that in the future a large % of the world will live under regimes where the ability to interact with others illegally will be a strong value prop. (Not just financially, but in terms of speech, etc.)
daoismyname 5y ago
> It’s worth considering what the value proposition of crypto looks like if you were to find yourself living under an illegitimate authority The cables where communications pass through are protected by armies If crypto eventually could pose a threat to those illegitimate authorities, they would give orders to cut the cables and games would be over. they could also trace them back to your house.
- 5y ago

iskander 5y ago

>I own several crypto-currencies and there hasn't been a single moment in which I thought of buying something with a crypto-currency. This is entirely personal and subjective, but I prefer the user experience of Aave and Yearn to traditional banking with e.g. Chase. I also would way rather make large purchases with crypto (e.g. down payment on a house) compared with wiring money.

zepto 5y ago
Why is ‘wiring’ so bad from your point of view?
- kwertyoowiyop 5y ago
  Indeed. I’ll gladly pay $20 to have a professional human in the loop when I transfer the down payment on a house.
  - arcticbull 5y ago
    Wires are often free. My bank (HSBC) charges me nothing for domestic wires, my brokerage (IBKR) charges me nothing for domestic wires, Schwab charges nothing for domestic wires, neither does Fidelity, USAA or Ally - even FTX charges nothing for domestic wires - even though moving USDC-ETH out of FTX and into your wallet costs $25.
    - bryik 5y ago
      > Wires are often free. Do you have a citation for this? The articles I found online suggest fees are almost universal, with only a single bank (Fidelity) offering true $0 wire transfer fees to all customers [0]. 0 - https://www.nerdwallet.com/article/banking/wire-transfers-what-banks-charge https://www.nerdwallet.com/article/banking/wire-transfers-wh...
      - arcticbull 5y ago
        Here's references, although it looks like Ally and USAA have started charging fees since I looked. HSBC offer free wires for Premier customers. [1] IBKR offers the first domestic wire per month free, subsequent $10. [2] Schwab also offers 1 free per month for qualified customers. [3] Fidelity offers free wires. [4] FTX offers free wires ("We are not currently charging for wire deposits or withdrawals.") [5] Chase Premier Plus and Sapphire checking do not charge wire fees. [6] TD Bank offers 1 free wire transfer per statement cycle. [7] Citigold accounts offer free wires. [8] CIT Bank depending on balance. [9] They're not always free, to be sure - most of the low-end accounts charge for them, but then, those low-end accounts charge for practically everything. That said, TD Bank, Fidelity, Schwab, IBKR all offer at least 1 free wire per month for all customers. If you have any meaningful balances or monthly income, you shouldn't ever pay for wires. Every retail bank offers free wires for qualifying customers to the best of my knowledge. [1] https://www.us.hsbc.com/content/dam/hsbc/us/docs/pdf/deposit-terms-and-charges/hsbc_premier_tcs.pdf https://www.us.hsbc.com/content/dam/hsbc/us/docs/pdf/deposit... p.3 [2] https://www.interactivebrokers.com/en/index.php?f=14718 https://www.interactivebrokers.com/en/index.php?f=14718 [3] https://www.schwab.com/legal/schwab-pricing-guide-for-individual-investors https://www.schwab.com/legal/schwab-pricing-guide-for-indivi... [4] https://www.fidelity.com/customer-service/choose-eft-or-bank-wire https://www.fidelity.com/customer-service/choose-eft-or-bank... [5] https://help.ftx.us/hc/en-us/articles/360043579273-Fees https://help.ftx.us/hc/en-us/articles/360043579273-Fees [6] https://www.chase.com/content/dam/chase-ux/documents/personal/checking/ABSF-en.pdf https://www.chase.com/content/dam/chase-ux/documents/persona... [7] https://www.feeds.td.com/en/document/oao/pdf/1_fees.pdf https://www.feeds.td.com/en/document/oao/pdf/1_fees.pdf [8] https://online.citi.com/US/JRS/pands/detail.do?ID=WireTransfers https://online.citi.com/US/JRS/pands/detail.do?ID=WireTransf... [9] https://www.cit.com/cit-bank/resources/schedule-of-fees https://www.cit.com/cit-bank/resources/schedule-of-fees

EGreg 5y ago

We are underfunded but we are building software to solve meaningful problems with Web3: https://intercoin.org/applications https://intercoin.org/applications https://intercoin.org/presentation.pdf https://intercoin.org/presentation.pdf kind of explains what needs to be fixed in the space. I’d tove to get your feedback

platz 5y ago

NFT's don't grant you any rights of ownership of JPEGs

whoisjuan 5y ago
They don't but that’s how people interpret NFTs. They think of NFTs as buying an asset that demonstrates authentic ownership of media. NFTs conceptual value doesn’t map to anything that seems remotely valuable at present moment. There’s no mental model for owning this inmaterial thing that is pegged to a digital file that can be duplicated infinitely without your approval.
- ShamelessC 5y ago
  > There’s no mental model for owning this inmaterial thing that is pegged to a digital file that can be duplicated infinitely without your approval. We have been dealing with this since the dawn of Napster. I'm pretty sure people understand ownership of digital creations and the ease with which they can be duplicated/pirated.
- zepto 5y ago
  > that’s how people interpret NFTs Almost no ‘people’ interpret NFTs this way. > There’s no mental model for owning this inmaterial thing that is pegged to a digital file that can be duplicated infinitely without your approval. There is no mental model because there is no ownership.