6 ms·

Is this satire? I honestly can't tell anymore with projects surrounding cryptocurrencies.

by 2pEXgD0fZ5cF 4y ago

anonporridge 4y ago
The project is serious, but the name is making fun of Web3.
- woojoo666 4y ago
  How are they making fun of web3 when everything about the project aligns exactly with every other web3 project? Is there a page highlighting the difference between this project and web3?
  - anonporridge 4y ago
    Unlike web3, there is no flood of altcoins that early VC investors got in ICOs and are trying to dump onto retail. It's all based on bitcoin as the foundational timechain that periodically locks in state changes. As bitcoin is the most immutable database to ever exist in human civilization, it only makes sense to use it rather than try to spin up some new network.
    - woojoo666 4y ago
      That just sounds like they're strawmanning web3 to try and differentiate themselves. If that's their marketing angle then sure, but to everybody else they're web3
      - anonporridge 4y ago
        I mean, no, the proposed architectures are fundamentally different. Web3 is proposed as building on a slew of disconnected, smaller blockchains with feeble security guarantees. There's a strong profit incentive to go this way because early investors can pump and dump the tokens on these alternative blockchains. But it's fragile and doesn't scale well because it's so disorganized. Web5 is proposed as building non-blockchain decentralized and censorship resistant systems, using the extremely secure bitcoin blockchain as it's only foundation. They're not trying to put absolutely all data on the base blockchain, which is incredibly inefficient and will never scale. They aren't issuing new tokens that insiders have privileged early access to. Web3 is a scam. Web5 is an attempt at the real deal.
        woojoo666 4y ago
        Web3 doesn't put everything on-chain though? IPFS doesn't put data on the blockchain, and scales plenty fine
        anonporridge 4y ago
        IPFS isn't web3. In fact, raw IPFS is closer to the spirit of web5 than it is web3, although the foundation building it submitted to the altcoin craze with Filecoin. > The term "Web3" was coined by Polkadot founder and Ethereum co-founder Gavin Wood in 2014, referring to a "decentralized online ecosystem based on blockchain."[1] In 2021, the idea of Web3 gained popularity.[21] Particular interest spiked toward the end of 2021, largely due to interest from cryptocurrency enthusiasts and investments from high-profile technologists and companies.[6][7] Executives from venture capital firm Andreessen Horowitz traveled to Washington, D.C. in October 2021 to lobby for the idea as a potential solution to questions about regulation of the web, with which policymakers have been grappling.[22] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Web3 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Web3
        woojoo666 4y ago
        This is the strawmanning that I was talking about. Gavin Woods alone doesn't define Web3. Most people consider IPFS to not just be part of web3, but a pretty major part. Look up Web3 articles and you will find many include IPFS. It's really starting to seem like Web5 is just Web3. Edit: I think this discussion is quickly losing it's value and turning into a debate about definitions. But overall I'm just not sure if I agree with Jack Dorsey alienating the entire Web3 community when his vision aligns so closely. I understand being put off by the more scammy parts of crypto, and that is something that crypto has to address, but the majority of Web3 is full of developers honestly working towards decentralization and personal ownership. If Jack Dorsey and Web5 wants to cut themselves away from that community, I guess we'll see how it works out for them
zombiwoof 4y ago
This is technology looking for a problem. When users own their data, what will they do, sell it to make money on it back to the companies we don't with their data. If the companies making money (Google, FB, etc) on users Data aren't making money, then we have a Catch-22. Users can have their data, but there are no viable services around to be profitable enough to operate. Jack is making a big deal out of something b/c he's trying to make a legacy beyond the dumpster fire that is Twitter, or a fancy looking cash register system.

Is this satire? I honestly can't tell anymore with projects surrounding cryptocurrencies.

anonporridge 4y ago

The project is serious, but the name is making fun of Web3.

woojoo666 4y ago
How are they making fun of web3 when everything about the project aligns exactly with every other web3 project? Is there a page highlighting the difference between this project and web3?
- anonporridge 4y ago
  Unlike web3, there is no flood of altcoins that early VC investors got in ICOs and are trying to dump onto retail. It's all based on bitcoin as the foundational timechain that periodically locks in state changes. As bitcoin is the most immutable database to ever exist in human civilization, it only makes sense to use it rather than try to spin up some new network.
  - woojoo666 4y ago
    That just sounds like they're strawmanning web3 to try and differentiate themselves. If that's their marketing angle then sure, but to everybody else they're web3
    - anonporridge 4y ago
      I mean, no, the proposed architectures are fundamentally different. Web3 is proposed as building on a slew of disconnected, smaller blockchains with feeble security guarantees. There's a strong profit incentive to go this way because early investors can pump and dump the tokens on these alternative blockchains. But it's fragile and doesn't scale well because it's so disorganized. Web5 is proposed as building non-blockchain decentralized and censorship resistant systems, using the extremely secure bitcoin blockchain as it's only foundation. They're not trying to put absolutely all data on the base blockchain, which is incredibly inefficient and will never scale. They aren't issuing new tokens that insiders have privileged early access to. Web3 is a scam. Web5 is an attempt at the real deal.
      - woojoo666 4y ago
        Web3 doesn't put everything on-chain though? IPFS doesn't put data on the blockchain, and scales plenty fine
        anonporridge 4y ago
        IPFS isn't web3. In fact, raw IPFS is closer to the spirit of web5 than it is web3, although the foundation building it submitted to the altcoin craze with Filecoin. > The term "Web3" was coined by Polkadot founder and Ethereum co-founder Gavin Wood in 2014, referring to a "decentralized online ecosystem based on blockchain."[1] In 2021, the idea of Web3 gained popularity.[21] Particular interest spiked toward the end of 2021, largely due to interest from cryptocurrency enthusiasts and investments from high-profile technologists and companies.[6][7] Executives from venture capital firm Andreessen Horowitz traveled to Washington, D.C. in October 2021 to lobby for the idea as a potential solution to questions about regulation of the web, with which policymakers have been grappling.[22] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Web3 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Web3
        woojoo666 4y ago
        This is the strawmanning that I was talking about. Gavin Woods alone doesn't define Web3. Most people consider IPFS to not just be part of web3, but a pretty major part. Look up Web3 articles and you will find many include IPFS. It's really starting to seem like Web5 is just Web3. Edit: I think this discussion is quickly losing it's value and turning into a debate about definitions. But overall I'm just not sure if I agree with Jack Dorsey alienating the entire Web3 community when his vision aligns so closely. I understand being put off by the more scammy parts of crypto, and that is something that crypto has to address, but the majority of Web3 is full of developers honestly working towards decentralization and personal ownership. If Jack Dorsey and Web5 wants to cut themselves away from that community, I guess we'll see how it works out for them

zombiwoof 4y ago

This is technology looking for a problem. When users own their data, what will they do, sell it to make money on it back to the companies we don't with their data. If the companies making money (Google, FB, etc) on users Data aren't making money, then we have a Catch-22. Users can have their data, but there are no viable services around to be profitable enough to operate. Jack is making a big deal out of something b/c he's trying to make a legacy beyond the dumpster fire that is Twitter, or a fancy looking cash register system.