3 ms·

The best part is, in the pure Web 3.0 vision, http:// http:// would be deprecated. It's somewhat absurd. The description of a proposed post-WWW Internet as "the

The best part is, in the pure Web 3.0 vision, http:// http:// would be deprecated. It's somewhat absurd. The description of a proposed post-WWW Internet as "the Web" is incoherent. That being said, I think there are some critically important ideas involved. I came up with the term Internet 4 as a substitute but that's also not exactly accurate.

capableweb 5y ago
What is this "pure Web 3.0 vision" you talk about? As originally meant by Gavin Wood, Web3 is an idea or concept, not a particular technology. If it's using http (the protocol) or not has nothing to do with that particular meaning of Web3, so maybe you're referring to something else, as I have not yet heard about this "pure Web 3.0 vision" you talk about.
- digitailor 5y ago
  You're correct, it's not an actual thing. I'm using it as a device to summarize the kinds of protocols and networks that are part of common visions for what Web 3.0 constitutes. There is no canonical "pure Web 3.0" vision I can point to. But http:// http:// doesn't play strongly in most advanced visions, especially if you subscribe to the hypothesis that wallets will move on from the web browser for average users for security reasons. Speculatively, wallets could possibly become a kind of browser themselves, with http://'s http://'s utility becoming more marginalized eventually. I'm not referring to Gavin Wood's specific conception or the associated Polkadot and its foundation's specific usage of the term. FWIW, I'm really trying to dissect the name and not the vision and perhaps not doing it that well. As far as I'm concerned, the usage of the term predates even bitcoin and originally meant Semantic Web. Content-addressable networks like IPFS or Arweave could be seen as related to that conception, but it's a bit of a stretch.

3 ms·

The best part is, in the pure Web 3.0 vision, http:// http:// would be deprecated. It's somewhat absurd. The description of a proposed post-WWW Internet as "the

by digitailor 5y ago

capableweb 5y ago
What is this "pure Web 3.0 vision" you talk about? As originally meant by Gavin Wood, Web3 is an idea or concept, not a particular technology. If it's using http (the protocol) or not has nothing to do with that particular meaning of Web3, so maybe you're referring to something else, as I have not yet heard about this "pure Web 3.0 vision" you talk about.
- digitailor 5y ago
  You're correct, it's not an actual thing. I'm using it as a device to summarize the kinds of protocols and networks that are part of common visions for what Web 3.0 constitutes. There is no canonical "pure Web 3.0" vision I can point to. But http:// http:// doesn't play strongly in most advanced visions, especially if you subscribe to the hypothesis that wallets will move on from the web browser for average users for security reasons. Speculatively, wallets could possibly become a kind of browser themselves, with http://'s http://'s utility becoming more marginalized eventually. I'm not referring to Gavin Wood's specific conception or the associated Polkadot and its foundation's specific usage of the term. FWIW, I'm really trying to dissect the name and not the vision and perhaps not doing it that well. As far as I'm concerned, the usage of the term predates even bitcoin and originally meant Semantic Web. Content-addressable networks like IPFS or Arweave could be seen as related to that conception, but it's a bit of a stretch.