6 ms·

As a crypto and web3 fan I actually agree with the article but not with the title. To me decentralization is a value. It's a goal, and yes, a goal that almost

As a crypto and web3 fan I actually agree with the article but not with the title. To me decentralization is a value. It's a goal, and yes, a goal that almost every web3 project falls short of in some way. But I think values are important. Values play a huge part in guiding human behavior. And the human side of web3 is MASSIVELY underrated in my opinion. I don't think people realize that we can shape web3 by building up the right culture around it. By teaching people what things they should look out for. Because without that, they'll just be drawn in by blind profits and screwed over because we didn't tell them how to think about web3. To a certain extent web3 critics are creating a self-fulfilling prophecy. They are simultaneously criticizing web3 for valuing decentralization while also criticizing web3 for not being decentralized enough. It creates apathy around decentralization and other web3 ideas. I think web3 critics would serve people better not by criticizing web3 but instead criticizing projects for not being web3 enough. What I don't think people on HN or Twitter understand is that right now web3 is a foundation. We can build technology and culture around it to help people.

thr0wawayf00 5y ago
> To me decentralization is a value. It's a goal, and yes, a goal that almost every web3 project falls short of in some way. But the whole point of building these systems is to get away from the entrenched interests of centralized authority, and if these systems can't actually deliver on that, then what's the point of adopting them? At least my bank accounts are insured if the bank fails and transactions have to clear ACH. If my credit card gets stolen, I call Visa and they make it go away in a matter of minutes. If someone gets access to my private key, that's it, there's nothing I can do to get my crypto back. I don't want "kinda decentralized", I want "definitely decentralized". This attitude represents a major goalpost shift for this kind of movement. > But I think values are important. Values play a huge part in guiding human behavior. This seems to be a bit romantic to me. The community can talk about values all they want, but it doesn't change the fact that shitcoins are everywhere. We can all agree murder is bad, but that isn't going to stop murders from happening.
- serverholic 5y ago
  There is still a lot of value in "kinda decentralized". For example, you can download smart-contract bytecode and verify it. Go ahead and call up visa and ask for their source code. Another example is the immutability of smart contracts. If someone updates a contract and you don't like it then you can keep using the old one. Go ask robinhood if you can use an old version of their app. As far as private keys, I really don't know what to tell you. People lose their passwords all the time. Also smart wallets will help you recover you crypto wallet. UX is moving in the right direction here. > This seems to be a bit romantic to me. The community can talk about values all they want, but it doesn't change the fact that shitcoins are everywhere. We can all agree murder is bad, but that isn't going to stop murders from happening. So should we stop using email because of phishing? Or stop using phones because of spam calls? We educate people on phishing. We educate people on scam calls. We educate people on the dangers of investing in penny stocks. We educate people on the dangers of options trading. Why can't we educate people on shitcoins and decentralization? That's my point, crypto is a wild place but we can absolutely create a culture that moves things in the right direction.
  - preseinger 5y ago
    > Go ahead and call up visa and ask for their source code. Visa's source code is incidental to the value it provides me. > Go ask robinhood if you can use an old version of their app. The version of the Robinhood app I'm using is incidental to the value it provides me. Their value is actually pretty strongly correlated with their ability to evolve their codebase in response to market demands without being burdened with backwards compatibility. > People lose their passwords all the time. Yep, and then they recover them, which isn't possible with a lost private key. > crypto is a wild place but we can absolutely create a culture that moves things in the right direction That crypto and decentralization is "the right direction" is absolutely not self-evident. Can you substantiate that position?
    - serverholic 5y ago
      In that case I'm happy Robinhood hasn't screwed you over. Unfortunately that isn't the case for everyone. In the past Robinhood has done questionable things like halting trading on a specific stock (GME) that other platforms didn't halt. I've also heard horror stories about people getting margin called due to bugs. I'm not saying smart-contracts are immune to these issues but the transparency of the bytecode being public is huge IMO. This is just a single example of course. Imagine for a moment that we have a decentralized facebook-like app. Wouldn't it be great if we could fork it if they did something we didn't like? You might think that's a pipe dream but my argument is that this becomes less of a pipedream the more we educate people. > That crypto and decentralization is "the right direction" is absolutely not self-evident. Can you substantiate that position? My position is that crypto and decentralization give people options and put pressure on existing institutions that IMO have become too powerful. My goal isn't necessarily to destroy Bank of America, Visa, or Robinhood but to inject some real competition into the system. That includes institutions like the federal reserve. I want there to be a spectrum of centralization <-> decentralization and let people choose what they're comfortable with. I want people to be able to say "Fuck bank of america, I'm going bankless". Or people can stick with what they know. Either way I think competition is good.
Nursie 5y ago
To me decentralization is a fetish, a thing which provides little utility in itself but which people are willing to spend a lot of time, effort and money to pay lip service to.
- goodpoint 5y ago
  Decentralization is a very meaningful concept but it's being watered down by grifters.
preseinger 5y ago
Decentralization is not self-evidently valuable. It's a property of a system that has pros and cons, and the cons are significant.
- serverholic 5y ago
  The cons of centralization are significant. The decentralization narrative spawned because the world has become increasingly centralized. It's a balancing force.
  - preseinger 5y ago
    Sure, both centralization and decentralization have pros and cons. But the momentum driving web3 and crypto isn't some societal push-back against the common enemy of the centralized internet, it's almost entirely a product of venture capital seeking ROI.
    - maybelsyrup 5y ago
      > it's almost entirely a product of venture capital seeking ROI. This is a generous description for what's basically AmWay but less useful. Agree w/ your point.
PikachuEXE 5y ago
Agree I look at decentralization as a direction for some values. I have some idea what those values are but still exploring. Could be "separate of risk compared to current centralization". Could be "take back control and responsibility of xxx management". But "web3" or decentralization provides me a great opportunity to think, rethink, and ACT based on thinking results. We will have limitations, bugs, issues on probably every product made for "web3/decentralization". It's fine to criticize those flaws. But I think we should separate "criticize product flaws" from "criticize value/direction". Mixing both together makes conversation harder to continue for me.
pjc50 5y ago
The problem with web3, and the reason so many people actively hate it, is that "grift" is the primary value. web1 was "decentralize by making everything free". web3 is "let a thousand scams bloom". You get kudos in cryptoland by making the number go up - when converted to dollars.

thr0wawayf00 5y ago

> To me decentralization is a value. It's a goal, and yes, a goal that almost every web3 project falls short of in some way. But the whole point of building these systems is to get away from the entrenched interests of centralized authority, and if these systems can't actually deliver on that, then what's the point of adopting them? At least my bank accounts are insured if the bank fails and transactions have to clear ACH. If my credit card gets stolen, I call Visa and they make it go away in a matter of minutes. If someone gets access to my private key, that's it, there's nothing I can do to get my crypto back. I don't want "kinda decentralized", I want "definitely decentralized". This attitude represents a major goalpost shift for this kind of movement. > But I think values are important. Values play a huge part in guiding human behavior. This seems to be a bit romantic to me. The community can talk about values all they want, but it doesn't change the fact that shitcoins are everywhere. We can all agree murder is bad, but that isn't going to stop murders from happening.

serverholic 5y ago
There is still a lot of value in "kinda decentralized". For example, you can download smart-contract bytecode and verify it. Go ahead and call up visa and ask for their source code. Another example is the immutability of smart contracts. If someone updates a contract and you don't like it then you can keep using the old one. Go ask robinhood if you can use an old version of their app. As far as private keys, I really don't know what to tell you. People lose their passwords all the time. Also smart wallets will help you recover you crypto wallet. UX is moving in the right direction here. > This seems to be a bit romantic to me. The community can talk about values all they want, but it doesn't change the fact that shitcoins are everywhere. We can all agree murder is bad, but that isn't going to stop murders from happening. So should we stop using email because of phishing? Or stop using phones because of spam calls? We educate people on phishing. We educate people on scam calls. We educate people on the dangers of investing in penny stocks. We educate people on the dangers of options trading. Why can't we educate people on shitcoins and decentralization? That's my point, crypto is a wild place but we can absolutely create a culture that moves things in the right direction.
- preseinger 5y ago
  > Go ahead and call up visa and ask for their source code. Visa's source code is incidental to the value it provides me. > Go ask robinhood if you can use an old version of their app. The version of the Robinhood app I'm using is incidental to the value it provides me. Their value is actually pretty strongly correlated with their ability to evolve their codebase in response to market demands without being burdened with backwards compatibility. > People lose their passwords all the time. Yep, and then they recover them, which isn't possible with a lost private key. > crypto is a wild place but we can absolutely create a culture that moves things in the right direction That crypto and decentralization is "the right direction" is absolutely not self-evident. Can you substantiate that position?
  - serverholic 5y ago
    In that case I'm happy Robinhood hasn't screwed you over. Unfortunately that isn't the case for everyone. In the past Robinhood has done questionable things like halting trading on a specific stock (GME) that other platforms didn't halt. I've also heard horror stories about people getting margin called due to bugs. I'm not saying smart-contracts are immune to these issues but the transparency of the bytecode being public is huge IMO. This is just a single example of course. Imagine for a moment that we have a decentralized facebook-like app. Wouldn't it be great if we could fork it if they did something we didn't like? You might think that's a pipe dream but my argument is that this becomes less of a pipedream the more we educate people. > That crypto and decentralization is "the right direction" is absolutely not self-evident. Can you substantiate that position? My position is that crypto and decentralization give people options and put pressure on existing institutions that IMO have become too powerful. My goal isn't necessarily to destroy Bank of America, Visa, or Robinhood but to inject some real competition into the system. That includes institutions like the federal reserve. I want there to be a spectrum of centralization <-> decentralization and let people choose what they're comfortable with. I want people to be able to say "Fuck bank of america, I'm going bankless". Or people can stick with what they know. Either way I think competition is good.

Nursie 5y ago

To me decentralization is a fetish, a thing which provides little utility in itself but which people are willing to spend a lot of time, effort and money to pay lip service to.

goodpoint 5y ago
Decentralization is a very meaningful concept but it's being watered down by grifters.

preseinger 5y ago

Decentralization is not self-evidently valuable. It's a property of a system that has pros and cons, and the cons are significant.

serverholic 5y ago
The cons of centralization are significant. The decentralization narrative spawned because the world has become increasingly centralized. It's a balancing force.
- preseinger 5y ago
  Sure, both centralization and decentralization have pros and cons. But the momentum driving web3 and crypto isn't some societal push-back against the common enemy of the centralized internet, it's almost entirely a product of venture capital seeking ROI.
  - maybelsyrup 5y ago
    > it's almost entirely a product of venture capital seeking ROI. This is a generous description for what's basically AmWay but less useful. Agree w/ your point.

PikachuEXE 5y ago

Agree I look at decentralization as a direction for some values. I have some idea what those values are but still exploring. Could be "separate of risk compared to current centralization". Could be "take back control and responsibility of xxx management". But "web3" or decentralization provides me a great opportunity to think, rethink, and ACT based on thinking results. We will have limitations, bugs, issues on probably every product made for "web3/decentralization". It's fine to criticize those flaws. But I think we should separate "criticize product flaws" from "criticize value/direction". Mixing both together makes conversation harder to continue for me.

pjc50 5y ago

The problem with web3, and the reason so many people actively hate it, is that "grift" is the primary value. web1 was "decentralize by making everything free". web3 is "let a thousand scams bloom". You get kudos in cryptoland by making the number go up - when converted to dollars.