4 ms·

It’s not emotionality, it’s rationalism. web3 is a naked pyramid grift, and most people promoting it are hoping to get rich from the “greater sucker” or have b

It’s not emotionality, it’s rationalism. web3 is a naked pyramid grift, and most people promoting it are hoping to get rich from the “greater sucker” or have been subsumed into a cult-type mindset. HackerNews is a high-quality rational discussion medium. The problem is not with this community, it is with the propaganda bubble of web3.

Hendrikto 4y ago
Claims like > web3 is a naked pyramid grift are not fostering an intellectually honest and objective debate. Sure, there are countless speculators. Agreed, many things are overhyped. The underlying technology is still innovative and enables novel solutions.
- HideousKojima 4y ago
  >The underlying technology is still innovative and enables novel solutions. The only situations where blockchain provides novel solutions is where you need something to be absolutely trustless, and even then the trustlessness is limited to things that happen on the blockchain. The moment the blockchain has to interact with the real world outside of the blockchain you get back to problems of trust. The range of problems that such technology is capable of solving is incredibly small. 99% of problems that I see people claiming are "solved" by blockchain were already solved by a boring old normal database like Postgres, or a distributed database like CockroachDB, or a distributed consensus algorithm like Raft. All of which are several orders of magnitude faster and more efficient than using a trustless, distributed blockchain. Please name a single real-world problem that you believe blockchain "solves."
- guerrilla 4y ago
  Yes, let's have an intellectualky honest and objevtive debate about if the world is flat. No, stop wasting people's time and energy with your obvious pyramid scheme.
- jeremyjh 4y ago
  We don't need a debate. We know shit from shinola when we see it.
- fleddr 4y ago
  Even the speculation part, which admittedly is the vast majority of crypto activity, is not that easily dismissed. The use case for speculation is making money. Making money is a pretty compelling use case. Most crypto traders are perfectly aware of the risks and play the game anyway. I mean, the owners of this very site fund a thousand startups only to see 10 succeed. Pure speculation.
fleddr 4y ago
You just proved that it's low quality as well as irrational. On a complex topic with an enormous scope, you claim to have an absolute and extreme answer, and present it as factual. That's pretty much impossible on any topic of high complexity. You present zero evidence to justify such extreme conclusion. That's low quality and irrational. To come to a high confidence conclusion on the whole of web3, one would have to actually read hundreds of articles at least, and spent significant time actually using the many products. I would doubt that you did so, and couldn't even pass the most basic test. So you have zero evidence and presumably zero knowledge or experience. And you're the rational one?
- polygamous_bat 4y ago
  > To come to a high confidence conclusion on the whole of web3, one would have to actually read hundreds of articles at least, and spent significant time actually using the many products. I would doubt that you did so, and couldn't even pass the most basic test. But then, above, > Further, when you use Stephen Diehl as a source, you already lost. This guy has an unhealthy obsession with hating crypto fueled by his own crypto startup failure. Please get your story straight; all I am getting is ad hominems. If we are going that route, please provide me with enough reason to not believe that you are one of the hordes of bagholders who bought into a pyramid scheme covered in layers of jargon in 2021 and are now trembling with fear after losing half of your gambling money that you were promised will double in no time; and are now desperately trying to draw in new marks for your decentralized MLM by advertising and name calling on hackernews. See how it works both ways?
  - fleddr 4y ago
    What exactly isn't "straight" about my position on crypto? The only thing I'm saying is that for such a vast and complicated space, both the absolutes (100% bad, 100% good) are suspicious, intellectually lazy and likely made by commenters with near-zero knowledge or experience. A character like Diehl is a "crypto is 100% bad" guy. Or more like 500% bad. It's a personal crusade. A crypto-bro shitcoin promoter is a "crypto is 100% good" guy. I reject both positions and characters. I regret to inform you that I own zero web3 tokens, nor do I have any other stake in any web3 project whatsoever. I'm not here to promote or defend crypto specifically. I'm here to defend (in vain) nuanced discussion and seeking truth. We could be having this same discussion about "JavaScript sucks" or "Elon Musk sucks" and I would do the same thing: reject simplistic absolutes by people who don't even know anything about said topic.

Hendrikto 4y ago

Claims like > web3 is a naked pyramid grift are not fostering an intellectually honest and objective debate. Sure, there are countless speculators. Agreed, many things are overhyped. The underlying technology is still innovative and enables novel solutions.

HideousKojima 4y ago
>The underlying technology is still innovative and enables novel solutions. The only situations where blockchain provides novel solutions is where you need something to be absolutely trustless, and even then the trustlessness is limited to things that happen on the blockchain. The moment the blockchain has to interact with the real world outside of the blockchain you get back to problems of trust. The range of problems that such technology is capable of solving is incredibly small. 99% of problems that I see people claiming are "solved" by blockchain were already solved by a boring old normal database like Postgres, or a distributed database like CockroachDB, or a distributed consensus algorithm like Raft. All of which are several orders of magnitude faster and more efficient than using a trustless, distributed blockchain. Please name a single real-world problem that you believe blockchain "solves."
guerrilla 4y ago
Yes, let's have an intellectualky honest and objevtive debate about if the world is flat. No, stop wasting people's time and energy with your obvious pyramid scheme.
jeremyjh 4y ago
We don't need a debate. We know shit from shinola when we see it.
fleddr 4y ago
Even the speculation part, which admittedly is the vast majority of crypto activity, is not that easily dismissed. The use case for speculation is making money. Making money is a pretty compelling use case. Most crypto traders are perfectly aware of the risks and play the game anyway. I mean, the owners of this very site fund a thousand startups only to see 10 succeed. Pure speculation.

fleddr 4y ago

You just proved that it's low quality as well as irrational. On a complex topic with an enormous scope, you claim to have an absolute and extreme answer, and present it as factual. That's pretty much impossible on any topic of high complexity. You present zero evidence to justify such extreme conclusion. That's low quality and irrational. To come to a high confidence conclusion on the whole of web3, one would have to actually read hundreds of articles at least, and spent significant time actually using the many products. I would doubt that you did so, and couldn't even pass the most basic test. So you have zero evidence and presumably zero knowledge or experience. And you're the rational one?

polygamous_bat 4y ago
> To come to a high confidence conclusion on the whole of web3, one would have to actually read hundreds of articles at least, and spent significant time actually using the many products. I would doubt that you did so, and couldn't even pass the most basic test. But then, above, > Further, when you use Stephen Diehl as a source, you already lost. This guy has an unhealthy obsession with hating crypto fueled by his own crypto startup failure. Please get your story straight; all I am getting is ad hominems. If we are going that route, please provide me with enough reason to not believe that you are one of the hordes of bagholders who bought into a pyramid scheme covered in layers of jargon in 2021 and are now trembling with fear after losing half of your gambling money that you were promised will double in no time; and are now desperately trying to draw in new marks for your decentralized MLM by advertising and name calling on hackernews. See how it works both ways?
- fleddr 4y ago
  What exactly isn't "straight" about my position on crypto? The only thing I'm saying is that for such a vast and complicated space, both the absolutes (100% bad, 100% good) are suspicious, intellectually lazy and likely made by commenters with near-zero knowledge or experience. A character like Diehl is a "crypto is 100% bad" guy. Or more like 500% bad. It's a personal crusade. A crypto-bro shitcoin promoter is a "crypto is 100% good" guy. I reject both positions and characters. I regret to inform you that I own zero web3 tokens, nor do I have any other stake in any web3 project whatsoever. I'm not here to promote or defend crypto specifically. I'm here to defend (in vain) nuanced discussion and seeking truth. We could be having this same discussion about "JavaScript sucks" or "Elon Musk sucks" and I would do the same thing: reject simplistic absolutes by people who don't even know anything about said topic.