4 ms·

99% of Web3 is crap. 1% pure gold. Same thing with the first .com bubble. AI have been through this too and is now having a revival. Blockchain and Web 3 is

99% of Web3 is crap. 1% pure gold. Same thing with the first .com bubble. AI have been through this too and is now having a revival. Blockchain and Web 3 is not going anywhere it will just not be championed by the current generation. The coming will use this as it was the most normal in the world.

jiggawatts 4y ago
> Same thing with the first .com bubble. The .com bubble ratio was more like 33% crap, 33% meh, and 33% gold. The "crash" was that people realised that the 33% crap was crap. The equivalent crash for Web3 would wipe it out completely, taking the 1% with it. Also, I don't agree that there is a 1% to begin with. I've never heard of any compelling use-case for Web3.
- ThomPete 4y ago
  Just because you haven't heard of one doesn't mean it doesn't exist. There is plenty of use for it, it's just not the same as for Web2.
  - jiggawatts 4y ago
    Feel free to list even one successful Web3 site. Not as in "could be useful in the future", but useful now, and used by a significant number of people for activities that are not directly crypto-related. Keep in mind that "web 1.0" was immediately useful, to many people, at a large scale. The original web wasn't restricted to web developers doing web development things. It was used by industry, government, and academia at scale almost immediately.
    - ThomPete 4y ago
      If you don't see the value of what is fundamentally a public ledger database, then I am not sure what to tell you. It's being used by many people today. It's not for everyone. It will evolve and at one point we won't even know we are using it. The thing about blockchain isn't that it isn't that you couldn't build it with "web2" the thing is it would be unfeasible to do so and still maintaining the trust. By separating the "owners" of the database from what it gets used to verify, things that are a kind of wicked problem or at least a chicken and egg problem become possible. Here are a couple of examples from my perspective of what is technically doable but practically unfeasible with a proprietary. https://twitter.com/Hello_World/status/1465382119811784708 https://twitter.com/Hello_World/status/1465382119811784708 https://twitter.com/Hello_World/status/1463539727202754563 https://twitter.com/Hello_World/status/1463539727202754563 I am pretty convinced that the government will be using this sooner or later too, for things that require transparency, but they are not going to be early adopters (in contrast with the internet where they were) But I am fine with you not seeing this or agreeing. Time will tell, I put my money were my mouth is :)
      - hiq 4y ago
        > It will evolve and at one point we won't even know we are using it. It's been more than 10 years and billions poured into the ecosystem since Bitcoin started, and I still don't know anybody who uses a blockchain for anything beyond speculation, even though I'm in tech. After how many more years without widespread adoption would you be convinced otherwise?
        ThomPete 4y ago
        10 years is nothing and again just because you don't know anyone, doesn't mean they don't exist so not sure what you want me to say to that. Plenty of people use is.
        hiq 4y ago
        From your other comment https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33228497 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33228497: > There is so much use for blockchain especially as infrastructure for society and in 10 years from now we will not even be thinking about it. So you do seem to think that 10 years matter and that it's the time left before it becomes part of our lives, but still it's unclear what's supposed to change in the meantime and why this hasn't happened yet. There's just as much money lost on a regular basis (maybe even more now that projects are bigger), it's still mostly a speculation platform, no real infra in sight and mostly "ideas" that don't pass a basic business plan analysis or simply the question: "wouldn't it be better to implement this idea, but without a blockchain?". Bitcoin has changed very little since its inception. The first 10 years haven't fundamentally changed its adoption, there's no reason to think that 10 more would do much more. "Just believe in it" is not very enticing for a technology.
        ThomPete 4y ago
        That is not the point I was making. My point is that Web 3.0 is not a great con and that it's here to stay and that down the line we won't even think about it. It also being used today, but today we are having the same kind of discussions as we had with the internet in the 90's Bitcoin changed from being currency to being store of value. Quite a big change. But again I am not sure who you are trying to convince here. I have already provided plenty of examples of what I think is use cases both from business to infrastructure to societally. I never said just believe it and I am not sure why that straw man is being thrown in there. It's always the same discussion though. People who say they want use cases aren't really interested in them. It's a weird phenomena to me but each to their own. You are more than welcome to think there isn't a reason to think it's going to work out and then you act accordingly to that belief. I see it differently I do see the need and act accordingly. It's all good.
bebtrrr 4y ago
> 1% pure gold Exactly which part of Web3 are you referring to here? I've not seen anything that matches your assessment.
- ajross 4y ago
  Presumably the brief moment where everyone thought they were going to get stinking rich.
- ThomPete 4y ago
  This is the thing. You either understand it or you don't. I can get you to see it. I don't have to, in the future it will be just there. Web3 is a special case of wild wild west in a market with way too much money inflating it all, but the fundamental principles about having an open database accessible to everyone is here to stay. The stock market is down up to 90% in some cases. You need to think about this when some of the problems there are today get resolved and new generations start building with this as part of the toolbox. But each to their own. I've just seen this so many times before and I can personally see the use cases, they are just not what most people think they are.
  - JohnFen 4y ago
    > I've just seen this so many times before and I can personally see the use cases, they are just not what most people think they are. Then what are they?
    - ThomPete 4y ago
      i posted a few links in another comment
CPLX 4y ago
That’s just wildly incorrect. The early internet was spectacularly useful. You could suddenly order rare books, book plane flights, find song lyrics, and all sorts of stuff you had wanted to do but couldn’t. I was there at the time. Every year like 11 new great use cases came along. It’s absolutely nothing like crypto.
- ThomPete 4y ago
  Not everyone agreed it was useful. That's the point. People laughed at email, buying online, payment was even illegal in the beginning. I was also there at the time from the very beginning. This is the same thing. Hype, then crash then re-construction then normalized. There is so much use for blockchain especially as infrastructure for society and in 10 years from now we will not even be thinking about it. It's no different.
  - CPLX 4y ago
    They really didn’t. The fact that it was really useful was blindingly obvious to everyone pretty quickly. Like nobody was confused thinking it was better to not be able to check your bank transaction history online. The question at the time was how useful, and how quickly things were going to be transformed and what it was all worth since the hype and valuations got out of control. And there were of course dumb ideas that got funded (like the cue cat) and good but early ideas that were overfunded and poorly executed (like webvan). But life was changing irreversibly at a very visible pace as digital solutions took over. Remember when every business district had a travel agent? There are no real uses of blockchain technology today that aren’t a variation on financial speculation (aka gambling) and illicit activity. Don’t get me wrong those are great use cases. Gambling and banned transactions are a major sector. But that’s the limit of the whole affair and that’s been obviously the case for a while.
    - ThomPete 4y ago
      Again we are discussing it right now. You don't see the use, I do. Whether I will be right time will tell, I am pretty sure I will, and the idea that this is a useless technology is simply a question of vision. There are plenty of use cases which are theoretically possible with Web2 but not feasible without Blockchain.
6nf 4y ago
> 1% pure gold. Nonsense

jiggawatts 4y ago

> Same thing with the first .com bubble. The .com bubble ratio was more like 33% crap, 33% meh, and 33% gold. The "crash" was that people realised that the 33% crap was crap. The equivalent crash for Web3 would wipe it out completely, taking the 1% with it. Also, I don't agree that there is a 1% to begin with. I've never heard of any compelling use-case for Web3.

ThomPete 4y ago
Just because you haven't heard of one doesn't mean it doesn't exist. There is plenty of use for it, it's just not the same as for Web2.
- jiggawatts 4y ago
  Feel free to list even one successful Web3 site. Not as in "could be useful in the future", but useful now, and used by a significant number of people for activities that are not directly crypto-related. Keep in mind that "web 1.0" was immediately useful, to many people, at a large scale. The original web wasn't restricted to web developers doing web development things. It was used by industry, government, and academia at scale almost immediately.
  - ThomPete 4y ago
    If you don't see the value of what is fundamentally a public ledger database, then I am not sure what to tell you. It's being used by many people today. It's not for everyone. It will evolve and at one point we won't even know we are using it. The thing about blockchain isn't that it isn't that you couldn't build it with "web2" the thing is it would be unfeasible to do so and still maintaining the trust. By separating the "owners" of the database from what it gets used to verify, things that are a kind of wicked problem or at least a chicken and egg problem become possible. Here are a couple of examples from my perspective of what is technically doable but practically unfeasible with a proprietary. https://twitter.com/Hello_World/status/1465382119811784708 https://twitter.com/Hello_World/status/1465382119811784708 https://twitter.com/Hello_World/status/1463539727202754563 https://twitter.com/Hello_World/status/1463539727202754563 I am pretty convinced that the government will be using this sooner or later too, for things that require transparency, but they are not going to be early adopters (in contrast with the internet where they were) But I am fine with you not seeing this or agreeing. Time will tell, I put my money were my mouth is :)
    - hiq 4y ago
      > It will evolve and at one point we won't even know we are using it. It's been more than 10 years and billions poured into the ecosystem since Bitcoin started, and I still don't know anybody who uses a blockchain for anything beyond speculation, even though I'm in tech. After how many more years without widespread adoption would you be convinced otherwise?
      - ThomPete 4y ago
        10 years is nothing and again just because you don't know anyone, doesn't mean they don't exist so not sure what you want me to say to that. Plenty of people use is.
        hiq 4y ago
        From your other comment https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33228497 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33228497: > There is so much use for blockchain especially as infrastructure for society and in 10 years from now we will not even be thinking about it. So you do seem to think that 10 years matter and that it's the time left before it becomes part of our lives, but still it's unclear what's supposed to change in the meantime and why this hasn't happened yet. There's just as much money lost on a regular basis (maybe even more now that projects are bigger), it's still mostly a speculation platform, no real infra in sight and mostly "ideas" that don't pass a basic business plan analysis or simply the question: "wouldn't it be better to implement this idea, but without a blockchain?". Bitcoin has changed very little since its inception. The first 10 years haven't fundamentally changed its adoption, there's no reason to think that 10 more would do much more. "Just believe in it" is not very enticing for a technology.
        ThomPete 4y ago
        That is not the point I was making. My point is that Web 3.0 is not a great con and that it's here to stay and that down the line we won't even think about it. It also being used today, but today we are having the same kind of discussions as we had with the internet in the 90's Bitcoin changed from being currency to being store of value. Quite a big change. But again I am not sure who you are trying to convince here. I have already provided plenty of examples of what I think is use cases both from business to infrastructure to societally. I never said just believe it and I am not sure why that straw man is being thrown in there. It's always the same discussion though. People who say they want use cases aren't really interested in them. It's a weird phenomena to me but each to their own. You are more than welcome to think there isn't a reason to think it's going to work out and then you act accordingly to that belief. I see it differently I do see the need and act accordingly. It's all good.

bebtrrr 4y ago

> 1% pure gold Exactly which part of Web3 are you referring to here? I've not seen anything that matches your assessment.

ajross 4y ago
Presumably the brief moment where everyone thought they were going to get stinking rich.
ThomPete 4y ago
This is the thing. You either understand it or you don't. I can get you to see it. I don't have to, in the future it will be just there. Web3 is a special case of wild wild west in a market with way too much money inflating it all, but the fundamental principles about having an open database accessible to everyone is here to stay. The stock market is down up to 90% in some cases. You need to think about this when some of the problems there are today get resolved and new generations start building with this as part of the toolbox. But each to their own. I've just seen this so many times before and I can personally see the use cases, they are just not what most people think they are.
- JohnFen 4y ago
  > I've just seen this so many times before and I can personally see the use cases, they are just not what most people think they are. Then what are they?
  - ThomPete 4y ago
    i posted a few links in another comment

CPLX 4y ago

That’s just wildly incorrect. The early internet was spectacularly useful. You could suddenly order rare books, book plane flights, find song lyrics, and all sorts of stuff you had wanted to do but couldn’t. I was there at the time. Every year like 11 new great use cases came along. It’s absolutely nothing like crypto.

ThomPete 4y ago
Not everyone agreed it was useful. That's the point. People laughed at email, buying online, payment was even illegal in the beginning. I was also there at the time from the very beginning. This is the same thing. Hype, then crash then re-construction then normalized. There is so much use for blockchain especially as infrastructure for society and in 10 years from now we will not even be thinking about it. It's no different.
- CPLX 4y ago
  They really didn’t. The fact that it was really useful was blindingly obvious to everyone pretty quickly. Like nobody was confused thinking it was better to not be able to check your bank transaction history online. The question at the time was how useful, and how quickly things were going to be transformed and what it was all worth since the hype and valuations got out of control. And there were of course dumb ideas that got funded (like the cue cat) and good but early ideas that were overfunded and poorly executed (like webvan). But life was changing irreversibly at a very visible pace as digital solutions took over. Remember when every business district had a travel agent? There are no real uses of blockchain technology today that aren’t a variation on financial speculation (aka gambling) and illicit activity. Don’t get me wrong those are great use cases. Gambling and banned transactions are a major sector. But that’s the limit of the whole affair and that’s been obviously the case for a while.
  - ThomPete 4y ago
    Again we are discussing it right now. You don't see the use, I do. Whether I will be right time will tell, I am pretty sure I will, and the idea that this is a useless technology is simply a question of vision. There are plenty of use cases which are theoretically possible with Web2 but not feasible without Blockchain.

6nf 4y ago

> 1% pure gold. Nonsense