4 ms·

Step 1 might be for "web3" proponents to stop publishing visions of the future that sound like grim dystopias. When you have game company executives mocking the

Step 1 might be for "web3" proponents to stop publishing visions of the future that sound like grim dystopias. When you have game company executives mocking the idea of "play to have fun" and NFT owners pushing for browser extensions that would make copy/paste illegal without permission from the blockchain what is the expected reaction? Should I be excited for a world of all-pervasive DRM and "games" that feel like working a second job?

gruez 4y ago
>Step 1 might be for "web3" proponents to stop publishing visions of the future that sound like grim dystopias. When you have game company executives mocking the idea of "play to have fun" and NFT owners pushing for browser extensions that would make copy/paste illegal without permission from the blockchain Is this an accurate depiction of "web3 proponents" in general or just a case of nutpicking[1]? I've heard of something vaguely similar to the first claim, but I can't remember whether it actually involved NFTs or was standard games-as-a-service rhetoric. For the second claim I heard something adjacent (eg. copy pasters), but I can't tell whether they're representative of the community or extremism/satire, and haven't heard of the specific proposal of browser DRM. [1] https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Nutpicking https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Nutpicking
- thebooktocome 4y ago
  Square-Enix’ President, earlier this year. Last three paragraphs before the sign-off. https://www.hd.square-enix.com/eng/news/2022/html/a_new_years_letter_from_the_president_2.html https://www.hd.square-enix.com/eng/news/2022/html/a_new_year...
  - throwaquestion5 4y ago
    "I realize that some people who “play to have fun” and who currently form the majority of players have voiced their reservations toward these new trends, and understandably so. However, I believe that there will be a certain number of people whose motivation is to “play to contribute,” by which I mean to help make the game more exciting... with advances in token economies, users will be provided with explicit incentives... this will lead to more people devoting themselves to such efforts and to greater possibilities of games growing in exciting ways. From having fun to earning to contributing" You weren't kidding. They really want people as grunt workers in the virtual world. I guess that's why they are trying to remove any association with the words 'games' and 'fun'.
  - gruez 4y ago
    I read the three paragraphs and don't see anything that can be construed as 'mocking the idea of "play to have fun"'. The first sentence of the second paragraph literally says >I realize that some people who “play to have fun” and who currently form the majority of players have voiced their reservations toward these new trends, and understandably so. Which seems like the opposite of "mock" to me.
    - JohnFen 4y ago
      Good point. "Dismiss" would be a better word. He's saying that the people who play for fun aren't important. The people who play in the hopes of getting money are.
- ironlake 4y ago
  It's actually very accurate. web1 - it's open! web2 - it's open (but really controlled by social media billionaires) web3 - you own digital property but good news, you can be a landlord and get money by leasing out that digital property, or you can be a speculator, or you can be a serf and work in an nft farm. Ignore the wash trading, paid celebrity endorsements, and the rugpulls.
ironlake 4y ago
It's even worse than that. No one can think of anything to do with web3 other than make money off web3. Most young technologies promise more than they can deliver, and the result is underwhelming or disappointing. Nuclear had regulatory and safety concerns that has slowed its adoption, early TVs had nothing to watch, self-driving cars haven't materialized though we can see progress, and machine learning gave us tags for photos. web3 has given us Ponzi schemes and nothing else. Not decentralized finance, not usable currencies, not "stores of value", not even games that are fun. Cryptokitties was kind of the bright spot. At least with other technologies, you could imagine benefits, even if they were cost-prohibitive or unlikely to develop soon. The proponents of web3 cannot articulate any desirable future state that will be brought about by their technology.
- zeruch 4y ago
  "No one can think of anything to do with web3 other than make money off web3." Agreed. And that in and of itself wouldn't be a problem if not for the fact that "The proponents of web3 cannot articulate any desirable future state that will be brought about by their technology. " it is trying to do things already done, and with zero value add except it theoretically rewards those who connive others into it first.

gruez 4y ago

>Step 1 might be for "web3" proponents to stop publishing visions of the future that sound like grim dystopias. When you have game company executives mocking the idea of "play to have fun" and NFT owners pushing for browser extensions that would make copy/paste illegal without permission from the blockchain Is this an accurate depiction of "web3 proponents" in general or just a case of nutpicking[1]? I've heard of something vaguely similar to the first claim, but I can't remember whether it actually involved NFTs or was standard games-as-a-service rhetoric. For the second claim I heard something adjacent (eg. copy pasters), but I can't tell whether they're representative of the community or extremism/satire, and haven't heard of the specific proposal of browser DRM. [1] https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Nutpicking https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Nutpicking

thebooktocome 4y ago
Square-Enix’ President, earlier this year. Last three paragraphs before the sign-off. https://www.hd.square-enix.com/eng/news/2022/html/a_new_years_letter_from_the_president_2.html https://www.hd.square-enix.com/eng/news/2022/html/a_new_year...
- throwaquestion5 4y ago
  "I realize that some people who “play to have fun” and who currently form the majority of players have voiced their reservations toward these new trends, and understandably so. However, I believe that there will be a certain number of people whose motivation is to “play to contribute,” by which I mean to help make the game more exciting... with advances in token economies, users will be provided with explicit incentives... this will lead to more people devoting themselves to such efforts and to greater possibilities of games growing in exciting ways. From having fun to earning to contributing" You weren't kidding. They really want people as grunt workers in the virtual world. I guess that's why they are trying to remove any association with the words 'games' and 'fun'.
- gruez 4y ago
  I read the three paragraphs and don't see anything that can be construed as 'mocking the idea of "play to have fun"'. The first sentence of the second paragraph literally says >I realize that some people who “play to have fun” and who currently form the majority of players have voiced their reservations toward these new trends, and understandably so. Which seems like the opposite of "mock" to me.
  - JohnFen 4y ago
    Good point. "Dismiss" would be a better word. He's saying that the people who play for fun aren't important. The people who play in the hopes of getting money are.
ironlake 4y ago
It's actually very accurate. web1 - it's open! web2 - it's open (but really controlled by social media billionaires) web3 - you own digital property but good news, you can be a landlord and get money by leasing out that digital property, or you can be a speculator, or you can be a serf and work in an nft farm. Ignore the wash trading, paid celebrity endorsements, and the rugpulls.

ironlake 4y ago

It's even worse than that. No one can think of anything to do with web3 other than make money off web3. Most young technologies promise more than they can deliver, and the result is underwhelming or disappointing. Nuclear had regulatory and safety concerns that has slowed its adoption, early TVs had nothing to watch, self-driving cars haven't materialized though we can see progress, and machine learning gave us tags for photos. web3 has given us Ponzi schemes and nothing else. Not decentralized finance, not usable currencies, not "stores of value", not even games that are fun. Cryptokitties was kind of the bright spot. At least with other technologies, you could imagine benefits, even if they were cost-prohibitive or unlikely to develop soon. The proponents of web3 cannot articulate any desirable future state that will be brought about by their technology.

zeruch 4y ago
"No one can think of anything to do with web3 other than make money off web3." Agreed. And that in and of itself wouldn't be a problem if not for the fact that "The proponents of web3 cannot articulate any desirable future state that will be brought about by their technology. " it is trying to do things already done, and with zero value add except it theoretically rewards those who connive others into it first.