4 ms·

web 1 = read web 2 = write web 3 = own

by cdiddy2 5y ago

AlexandrB 5y ago
I prefer Web 1 = amateur Web 2 = commercialized Web 3 = financialized
deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
hda2 5y ago
> web 3 = own 1. How would this work for me as a user? Are web 3 "websites" (or whatever constitutes a service or company) not able to retain a copy of my data? Or phrased in another way, what prevents websites from also /owning/ my data? 2. How would this work for me as a service? Aside from my service's domain and internet address which are annoyingly hard to "own", what else is there to own that I don't already own? I don't share hn's irrational hatred towards crypto so I'm not against joining whatever web3 is supposed to be (in principle) but I've yet to be shown a single benefit in doing so. Give me a single clear benefit to using or offering a web3 service.
- cdiddy2 5y ago
  Imagine there is a social media site with a friends list feature. Instead of the site owning the friends social graph there are a few transactions on chain the say who are friends with. The site looks at that data to automatically populate your friends list when you use your web wallet to sign in with them. No username/password logins needed in this world. The user can update their own social graph completely separate from the site with them having no control over who are are/aren't friends with. Now parts of the site are still centralized meaning that they could ignore whatever is on chain, but in that case its a lot easier for a competitor to start up, the users go over there with their web wallet sign on and boom the social graph is fully imported for them. Can even have parts of their profile/nft profile picture and ENS name come over as well. I hope that gets the gist of it, and it is still a long way from fully being realized but there are already beginnings with ENS profiles and avatars easily used between sites and lens protocol trying to make the social graph aspect. https://lens.dev/ https://lens.dev/

web 1 = read web 2 = write web 3 = own

AlexandrB 5y ago

I prefer Web 1 = amateur Web 2 = commercialized Web 3 = financialized

deleted 5y ago

[deleted]

hda2 5y ago

> web 3 = own 1. How would this work for me as a user? Are web 3 "websites" (or whatever constitutes a service or company) not able to retain a copy of my data? Or phrased in another way, what prevents websites from also /owning/ my data? 2. How would this work for me as a service? Aside from my service's domain and internet address which are annoyingly hard to "own", what else is there to own that I don't already own? I don't share hn's irrational hatred towards crypto so I'm not against joining whatever web3 is supposed to be (in principle) but I've yet to be shown a single benefit in doing so. Give me a single clear benefit to using or offering a web3 service.

cdiddy2 5y ago
Imagine there is a social media site with a friends list feature. Instead of the site owning the friends social graph there are a few transactions on chain the say who are friends with. The site looks at that data to automatically populate your friends list when you use your web wallet to sign in with them. No username/password logins needed in this world. The user can update their own social graph completely separate from the site with them having no control over who are are/aren't friends with. Now parts of the site are still centralized meaning that they could ignore whatever is on chain, but in that case its a lot easier for a competitor to start up, the users go over there with their web wallet sign on and boom the social graph is fully imported for them. Can even have parts of their profile/nft profile picture and ENS name come over as well. I hope that gets the gist of it, and it is still a long way from fully being realized but there are already beginnings with ENS profiles and avatars easily used between sites and lens protocol trying to make the social graph aspect. https://lens.dev/ https://lens.dev/