5 ms·

For those who don't know web3 is the idea of building a web on a decentralized blockchain. I think more specifically the idea is to replace the need for name s

by TimPC 4y ago

For those who don't know web3 is the idea of building a web on a decentralized blockchain. I think more specifically the idea is to replace the need for name servers with a blockchain protocol. Like anything blockchain there is no real solution for how to handle records becoming stale over time without a central authority that manages disputes. I find it ridiculous that this idea even got to occupy the name as I think we'd want to reserve it for the next generational change in web technology and not half-baked bs.

dcolkitt 4y ago
> there is no real solution for how to handle records becoming stale over time What do you mean? Record expiry can easily be incorporated into the smart contract protocol. ENS already does that. When you register an ENS domain, you can pre-pay for up to 10 years, after which you have to renew the domain. Same as web2 domain name registry.
mediocregopher 4y ago
I don't think that's what web3 is, that's just one direction some are taking it. Web3 is a move away from centralized platforms to ones which are either decentralized or more directly controlled by users (self-hosted, federated). > Like anything blockchain there is no real solution for how to handle records becoming stale over time without a central authority that manages disputes. I don't understand this part. In pretty much every decentralized name system I've seen a user pays to own a name for a period of time, there's no stale records.
- andybak 4y ago
  "Web3" has been fully co-opted to be blockchain related. Any former meaning is now drowned out by that definition, whether you like it or not.
  - BeetleB 4y ago
    > Any former meaning is now drowned out by that definition, whether you like it or not. Random pronouncements on HN don't make it true. If you want to restrict your understanding of the term, by all means do so. But don't expect others to follow suit.
    - andybak 4y ago
      Ok. We'll see where this end up. I hate it too but it feels too late to turn back the tide.
      - metalliqaz 4y ago
        You might be right. But just like crypto bros co-opted the term, it could very well be co-opted again by whatever tech seems like the next big thing after "everything is blockchain" fades into obscurity
        andybak 4y ago
        I suspect the term will have become tainted before that happens. "Metaverse" has turned into hollow nonsense within the last few months. But what do I know? I'm still sore that "content creator" now means "social media person" rather than "someone who creates content".
        deleted 4y ago
        [deleted]
- etchalon 4y ago
  We can have self-hosted, federated web sites with Web 1.0 technology.
  - sli 4y ago
    I used to use this obscure little piece of software for that called Apache. Maybe y'all have heard of it. Though I think it's getting some competition from this unknown little project called nginx. Really looking forward to that stuff becoming mainstream, it'll be revolutionary.
    - etchalon 4y ago
      TCP/IP is going to be wild.
throwaway82652 4y ago
The original definition of Web 3.0 (or Semantic Web) was conceived by Tim Berners-Lee and meant something completely different, it referred to a web that had all information assembled into an open graph that was easily accessible and machine readable with the goal of leading to an AI revolution. AFAICT the "web3" moniker was co-opted by Ethereum developers to refer to something which is almost entirely opposed to that, it's about locking everything up on the internet behind paywalls. But somehow this is supposed to be revolutionary because technically anyone can set up a paywall, as if they somehow couldn't do that before, as if web businesses haven't been a thing since the early 90s.
- enduser384729 4y ago
  Yes, and it is pretty typical of blockchain cheerleaders to imagine ideas that have already been imagined as revolutionary
- slowmovintarget 4y ago
  This. The Semantic Web produced some interesting technologies that lost their cool factor and dissolved into the background (SPARQL, graph DBs... etc.). Ontology everywhere simply never caught on because it wasn't worth it. This co-opting of term by blockchain-backed everything is for something actively dangerous as opposed to simply too little bang for too much buck.
  - cynusx 4y ago
    To be fair, the semantic web was also very much bullshit It completely ignored "trivial" things like the cost and benefits of maintaining machine-readable general compatibility with unknown consumers of said data. Companies and people are rational in their self-interest and the semantic web is just an academic utopia that was never meant to be. I personally think it's very fitting that web3 is now hijacked by crypto, another utopia dream that tries to deny the benefits of government and human judgement in the rule of law
    - tremon 4y ago
aimor 4y ago
What sparked the sudden surge of interest in "Web3"? Was there a specific blog post or talk that pushed web3 = distributed web into the spotlight? I feel like overnight there was all this discussion about web3 and it felt very artificial because I didn't see any build-up. https://trends.google.com/trends/explore?date=all&geo=US&q=web3 https://trends.google.com/trends/explore?date=all&geo=US&q=w...
- vmception 4y ago
  Its just VCs. Its the same playbook they (some of the same ones) did for Web 2.0, which was just as cringy at the time. Keep repeating it enough and it becomes normal.
- bombcar 4y ago
  The comparison graph breaks down: https://trends.google.com/trends/explore?date=all&geo=US&q=web3,nft https://trends.google.com/trends/explore?date=all&geo=US&q=w... but I feel it was around the NFT time, and "web3" was a way to market "blockchain" solutions without using the words "bitcoin" or "blockchain" directly. Everyone focuses on the big scams, but there's lots of "small-scale" attempts to get funding from big players who don't want to "miss out" - some may not be scams, but they're all filled with "true believers".
- atq2119 4y ago
  My cynical take is that some of the smarter players in the field were worried about running out of greater fools, so they did a concerted marketing push of something new.
davesque 4y ago
The feel like the meaning of the term "web3" is not so specific. It refers more generally to the idea of building decentralized services that run over blockchains whether they resemble web apps or not. I think the sentiment is that blockchain technology is imagined by some to be the next technology that will be as transformative as the web was when it first showed up. It's also a play on the term "web 2.0" which I believe referred to a new generation of more powerful web services and more refined design aesthetics that showed up on the web beginning around when Facebook started getting popular.
amanzi 4y ago
But from what I've read, there is still reliance on centralised APIs which still run on traditional servers and infrastructure. https://moxie.org/2022/01/07/web3-first-impressions.html https://moxie.org/2022/01/07/web3-first-impressions.html
throwoutway 4y ago
The blockchain pumpers co-opted the word “crypto” so it’s not too surprising they tried to co-opt the next generation of terms as well

by TimPC 4y ago

dcolkitt 4y ago

> there is no real solution for how to handle records becoming stale over time What do you mean? Record expiry can easily be incorporated into the smart contract protocol. ENS already does that. When you register an ENS domain, you can pre-pay for up to 10 years, after which you have to renew the domain. Same as web2 domain name registry.

mediocregopher 4y ago

I don't think that's what web3 is, that's just one direction some are taking it. Web3 is a move away from centralized platforms to ones which are either decentralized or more directly controlled by users (self-hosted, federated). > Like anything blockchain there is no real solution for how to handle records becoming stale over time without a central authority that manages disputes. I don't understand this part. In pretty much every decentralized name system I've seen a user pays to own a name for a period of time, there's no stale records.

andybak 4y ago
"Web3" has been fully co-opted to be blockchain related. Any former meaning is now drowned out by that definition, whether you like it or not.
- BeetleB 4y ago
  > Any former meaning is now drowned out by that definition, whether you like it or not. Random pronouncements on HN don't make it true. If you want to restrict your understanding of the term, by all means do so. But don't expect others to follow suit.
  - andybak 4y ago
    Ok. We'll see where this end up. I hate it too but it feels too late to turn back the tide.
    - metalliqaz 4y ago
      You might be right. But just like crypto bros co-opted the term, it could very well be co-opted again by whatever tech seems like the next big thing after "everything is blockchain" fades into obscurity
      - andybak 4y ago
        I suspect the term will have become tainted before that happens. "Metaverse" has turned into hollow nonsense within the last few months. But what do I know? I'm still sore that "content creator" now means "social media person" rather than "someone who creates content".
        deleted 4y ago
        [deleted]
etchalon 4y ago
We can have self-hosted, federated web sites with Web 1.0 technology.
- sli 4y ago
  I used to use this obscure little piece of software for that called Apache. Maybe y'all have heard of it. Though I think it's getting some competition from this unknown little project called nginx. Really looking forward to that stuff becoming mainstream, it'll be revolutionary.
  - etchalon 4y ago
    TCP/IP is going to be wild.

throwaway82652 4y ago

The original definition of Web 3.0 (or Semantic Web) was conceived by Tim Berners-Lee and meant something completely different, it referred to a web that had all information assembled into an open graph that was easily accessible and machine readable with the goal of leading to an AI revolution. AFAICT the "web3" moniker was co-opted by Ethereum developers to refer to something which is almost entirely opposed to that, it's about locking everything up on the internet behind paywalls. But somehow this is supposed to be revolutionary because technically anyone can set up a paywall, as if they somehow couldn't do that before, as if web businesses haven't been a thing since the early 90s.

enduser384729 4y ago
Yes, and it is pretty typical of blockchain cheerleaders to imagine ideas that have already been imagined as revolutionary
slowmovintarget 4y ago
This. The Semantic Web produced some interesting technologies that lost their cool factor and dissolved into the background (SPARQL, graph DBs... etc.). Ontology everywhere simply never caught on because it wasn't worth it. This co-opting of term by blockchain-backed everything is for something actively dangerous as opposed to simply too little bang for too much buck.
- cynusx 4y ago
  To be fair, the semantic web was also very much bullshit It completely ignored "trivial" things like the cost and benefits of maintaining machine-readable general compatibility with unknown consumers of said data. Companies and people are rational in their self-interest and the semantic web is just an academic utopia that was never meant to be. I personally think it's very fitting that web3 is now hijacked by crypto, another utopia dream that tries to deny the benefits of government and human judgement in the rule of law
  - tremon 4y ago

aimor 4y ago

What sparked the sudden surge of interest in "Web3"? Was there a specific blog post or talk that pushed web3 = distributed web into the spotlight? I feel like overnight there was all this discussion about web3 and it felt very artificial because I didn't see any build-up. https://trends.google.com/trends/explore?date=all&geo=US&q=web3 https://trends.google.com/trends/explore?date=all&geo=US&q=w...

vmception 4y ago
Its just VCs. Its the same playbook they (some of the same ones) did for Web 2.0, which was just as cringy at the time. Keep repeating it enough and it becomes normal.
bombcar 4y ago
The comparison graph breaks down: https://trends.google.com/trends/explore?date=all&geo=US&q=web3,nft https://trends.google.com/trends/explore?date=all&geo=US&q=w... but I feel it was around the NFT time, and "web3" was a way to market "blockchain" solutions without using the words "bitcoin" or "blockchain" directly. Everyone focuses on the big scams, but there's lots of "small-scale" attempts to get funding from big players who don't want to "miss out" - some may not be scams, but they're all filled with "true believers".
atq2119 4y ago
My cynical take is that some of the smarter players in the field were worried about running out of greater fools, so they did a concerted marketing push of something new.

davesque 4y ago

The feel like the meaning of the term "web3" is not so specific. It refers more generally to the idea of building decentralized services that run over blockchains whether they resemble web apps or not. I think the sentiment is that blockchain technology is imagined by some to be the next technology that will be as transformative as the web was when it first showed up. It's also a play on the term "web 2.0" which I believe referred to a new generation of more powerful web services and more refined design aesthetics that showed up on the web beginning around when Facebook started getting popular.

amanzi 4y ago

But from what I've read, there is still reliance on centralised APIs which still run on traditional servers and infrastructure. https://moxie.org/2022/01/07/web3-first-impressions.html https://moxie.org/2022/01/07/web3-first-impressions.html

throwoutway 4y ago

The blockchain pumpers co-opted the word “crypto” so it’s not too surprising they tried to co-opt the next generation of terms as well