4 ms·

> A centralization is otherwise no really desirable for many users. I’d argue the opposite-the benefits of decentralization are too abstract for most people to

> A centralization is otherwise no really desirable for many users. I’d argue the opposite-the benefits of decentralization are too abstract for most people to appreciate.

hunterb123 5y ago
I'd argue the opposite-the benefits of decentralization are clear and concise. edit: Central point of failures, ownership, privacy, etc etc.
- shadowgovt 5y ago
  Can you enumerate them?
  - hunterb123 5y ago
    I said "I'd argue" like I would, just as GP said "I'd argue". That means we aren't yet. I just wanted to voice that I disagreed so others could pick it up. Central point of failures, ownership, privacy, etc etc. Obvious stuff I don't want to ramble about. Only HN would try to downplay decentralization, something we know the benefits of, only to bash crypto/web3.
    - shadowgovt 5y ago
      Actually, the benefits of decentralization are worth weighing against the costs of decentralization. There's a reason that the process of going from web1 to web2 involved quite a bit of centralization. If web3 cannot meet its goals in a way that either maintains those benefits or creates a new benefit that substantively offsets the cost of losing them, people won't care. And if people don't care, this web3 will be as much an empty buzzword as when web3 referred to Siri and Alexa.
      - hunterb123 5y ago
        Web2 will still exist if it's so great. I guess we'll see who is right in the end. I for one just like the progression and the technology, and the empowerment it gives users vs operators. I guess that's lost here.
        shadowgovt 5y ago
        Does taking advantage of the benefits of web3 require users to become operators? Much of the transition off of small self-maintained websites occurred because new users were not interested in being operators, and existing operators were more interested in putting content out than in taking on the perpetual responsibility of being involved in the cat and mouse game against every malicious user on the planet that being an operator entails. I don't think web3 is dead in the water... I wouldn't even discuss it if I thought it was. But the challenges of creating a new paradigm that displaces the old one aren't technological alone... They're how to solve real problems real people have. What I have seen of the blockchain based solutions suggests to me that they aren't doing much to simplify using the blockchain itself, and I don't think we're going to boil the ocean of converting most web users to even neophyte cryptographers to get them on board with the trust model necessary for the blockchain to help with web3.
- acdha 5y ago
  What do you think those are, and how much does the average person care? The original web was more decentralized than what web3 proponents are selling, but over time users consistently chose a few major services. Why will they switch back and what will avoid that repeating again?
  - hunterb123 5y ago
    I guess they care how much they currently care. I don't see why that's relevant when talking about the benefits of decentralization. "People are too stupid/naive so let's not make anything better for anyone" is essentially what I'm hearing.
    - acdha 5y ago
      It’s relevant because it’s not “people are too stupid/naive” but rather that most people have different priorities. If you want people to use a new system, you need to have it do something they care about better than the status quo. That’s why I suggested learning from history: the reasons why people moved from personal sites to Facebook/Twitter/etc. are important for anyone trying to get them back.
      - hunterb123 5y ago
        No I don't think it's about personal sites at all and I wouldn't rely on the limited history of the internet but you'd see decentralized services have flourished until powers at be shut them down or gobbled them up. To those with different priorities than what I listed (privacy, ownership) they usually care about usability, and decentralized platforms can be just as usable and popular. I think all the hate is from the powers at be being threatened by Web3 and the power/control it gives users. If they can't shut it down or gobble it up, they'll run hate campaigns and convince smart people to hate it for them. Noone is hating on Web2 monopoly tech as much as this, let's just love all of the internet. Ask yourself, why are you rooting against this thing? But the really really cool thing about Web3 is, it doesn't matter what the haters say, it's here to stay and IS the future because it can't be stopped. - edit - > I'm rooting against scammers using something I do care about as a sales tactic for something which has failed to find market demand. A moral crusade then. Maybe tackle scamming on Web2 first?
DSingularity 5y ago
It’s not that they are too abstract it’s that they only hold in a fantastical alternate reality where the elite resign without a fight. In reality, if cryptocurrency takes power from the elite they will make it illegal and arrest 95% of its users who are incapable of learning how to mask their network participation. This is not reassuring for an idea whose decentralized powers are predicated on mass adoption.

> A centralization is otherwise no really desirable for many users. I’d argue the opposite-the benefits of decentralization are too abstract for most people to appreciate.

hunterb123 5y ago

I'd argue the opposite-the benefits of decentralization are clear and concise. edit: Central point of failures, ownership, privacy, etc etc.

shadowgovt 5y ago
Can you enumerate them?
- hunterb123 5y ago
  I said "I'd argue" like I would, just as GP said "I'd argue". That means we aren't yet. I just wanted to voice that I disagreed so others could pick it up. Central point of failures, ownership, privacy, etc etc. Obvious stuff I don't want to ramble about. Only HN would try to downplay decentralization, something we know the benefits of, only to bash crypto/web3.
  - shadowgovt 5y ago
    Actually, the benefits of decentralization are worth weighing against the costs of decentralization. There's a reason that the process of going from web1 to web2 involved quite a bit of centralization. If web3 cannot meet its goals in a way that either maintains those benefits or creates a new benefit that substantively offsets the cost of losing them, people won't care. And if people don't care, this web3 will be as much an empty buzzword as when web3 referred to Siri and Alexa.
    - hunterb123 5y ago
      Web2 will still exist if it's so great. I guess we'll see who is right in the end. I for one just like the progression and the technology, and the empowerment it gives users vs operators. I guess that's lost here.
      - shadowgovt 5y ago
        Does taking advantage of the benefits of web3 require users to become operators? Much of the transition off of small self-maintained websites occurred because new users were not interested in being operators, and existing operators were more interested in putting content out than in taking on the perpetual responsibility of being involved in the cat and mouse game against every malicious user on the planet that being an operator entails. I don't think web3 is dead in the water... I wouldn't even discuss it if I thought it was. But the challenges of creating a new paradigm that displaces the old one aren't technological alone... They're how to solve real problems real people have. What I have seen of the blockchain based solutions suggests to me that they aren't doing much to simplify using the blockchain itself, and I don't think we're going to boil the ocean of converting most web users to even neophyte cryptographers to get them on board with the trust model necessary for the blockchain to help with web3.
acdha 5y ago
What do you think those are, and how much does the average person care? The original web was more decentralized than what web3 proponents are selling, but over time users consistently chose a few major services. Why will they switch back and what will avoid that repeating again?
- hunterb123 5y ago
  I guess they care how much they currently care. I don't see why that's relevant when talking about the benefits of decentralization. "People are too stupid/naive so let's not make anything better for anyone" is essentially what I'm hearing.
  - acdha 5y ago
    It’s relevant because it’s not “people are too stupid/naive” but rather that most people have different priorities. If you want people to use a new system, you need to have it do something they care about better than the status quo. That’s why I suggested learning from history: the reasons why people moved from personal sites to Facebook/Twitter/etc. are important for anyone trying to get them back.
    - hunterb123 5y ago
      No I don't think it's about personal sites at all and I wouldn't rely on the limited history of the internet but you'd see decentralized services have flourished until powers at be shut them down or gobbled them up. To those with different priorities than what I listed (privacy, ownership) they usually care about usability, and decentralized platforms can be just as usable and popular. I think all the hate is from the powers at be being threatened by Web3 and the power/control it gives users. If they can't shut it down or gobble it up, they'll run hate campaigns and convince smart people to hate it for them. Noone is hating on Web2 monopoly tech as much as this, let's just love all of the internet. Ask yourself, why are you rooting against this thing? But the really really cool thing about Web3 is, it doesn't matter what the haters say, it's here to stay and IS the future because it can't be stopped. - edit - > I'm rooting against scammers using something I do care about as a sales tactic for something which has failed to find market demand. A moral crusade then. Maybe tackle scamming on Web2 first?

DSingularity 5y ago

It’s not that they are too abstract it’s that they only hold in a fantastical alternate reality where the elite resign without a fight. In reality, if cryptocurrency takes power from the elite they will make it illegal and arrest 95% of its users who are incapable of learning how to mask their network participation. This is not reassuring for an idea whose decentralized powers are predicated on mass adoption.