5 ms·

It should be obvious to everyone now that centralized platforms (like Apple's App Store) might be generous and foster innovation during their growth stages, but

It should be obvious to everyone now that centralized platforms (like Apple's App Store) might be generous and foster innovation during their growth stages, but then become extractive and limit innovation in later stages. After all, they have total control of the platforms. This is why decentralization matters.[1] The problem is that "decentralized" protocols often end up becoming de facto centralized because they lack key economic features.[2] And centralized platforms fill the gaps by offering those economic features — at the cost of giving them total control of the network.[3] This is why the most innovative and most interesting web applications occur in the browser, which is open and permissionless — and where web domains are mostly decentralized in nature. The only way to ensure a platform retains something close to its original economic properties is to ensure it remains decentralized, but it's hard to resist centralization. I know HN hates it, but there is a class of protocols that use cryptography and Byzantine fault-tolerant consensus mechanisms and are designed to resist centralization... and they have explicit and verifiable economic properties. They're known as crypto, and involve blockchains. And this appreciation for decentralized-by-design systems is colloquially called web3. [1]: https://cdixon.org/2018/02/18/why-decentralization-matters https://cdixon.org/2018/02/18/why-decentralization-matters [2]: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WGfS6pPJ5jo https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WGfS6pPJ5jo [3]: https://knightcolumbia.org/content/protocols-not-platforms-a-technological-approach-to-free-speech https://knightcolumbia.org/content/protocols-not-platforms-a...

wwweston 3y ago
I don't see hate for protocols or cryptography on HN. But I do see (a) skepticism about the actual decentralized (vs distributed) nature in practice (especially where the topic is financialized tech or even an end run around all the learning that's gone into the social codebase about finance). (b) realize that decentralization presented by things like the web are essentially "good enough" that capabilities are strong, personal or entrepreneurial latitude is pretty wide, and obstacles are few.
- lazzlazzlazz 3y ago
  EDIT: Thanks for this comment — I edited the original for clarity. I'm talking about crypto as in Ethereum, which are designed to resist centralization. HN wrongly thinks of crypto as a financial system (which it can do, for good and bad reasons thanks to its permissionlessness), instead of a family of methods for making composable, decentralized protocols with built-in economics (blockchains).
  - TobyTheDog123 3y ago
    But why do these protocols need built-in economics? No user is going to want to have a wallet that slowly drains as they use the web -- it's just not convenient and will be thoroughly rejected by the mainstream. Compare this to something like torrenting - people give, people take. Sure, indexing is centralized, but once you have the index, it's all p2p. That's the direction decentralization should be taking, instead of the next generation of microtransactions where they're required for operation.
    - invalidOrTaken 3y ago
      >No user is going to want to have a wallet that slowly drains as they use the web -- it's just not convenient and will be thoroughly rejected by the mainstream. You don't need the mainstream, you just need the cool kids. The mainstream will follow---or not. As for why anyone would want this, there is a very compelling reason---no ads.
      - arsome 3y ago
        But I already have no ads and no payments, so no thanks.
    - theK 3y ago
      You now too have a wallet that slowly drains while you use the internet. Web3 wallets are just better integrated into it. Also, there is a misconception that the cryptocurrency based web is like dial up. It isn't. What it is is: 1. a way to decouple the ownership of the digital goods from the service that gave them to you 2. a way to actually do privacy preserving computing 3. an open layer to build added value things that can interact with assets and services others have created (think web2.0 in the bookmarklets era but your bookmarklets can talk with any site)
kyleyeats 3y ago
It's called dweb. Sometimes people do get it confused with 'web3' but that was just the name of the massive 2-billion-dollar shit a16z took on everything. Dwebcamp just extended ticket sales if you want to go talk to real dweb people: https://dwebcamp.org/ https://dwebcamp.org/
- lazzlazzlazz 3y ago
  I'm familiar with dweb, but it seems that they're just preparing to relearn the lessons of the early web (federation doesn't work; you need mechanisms to maintain Byzantine fault tolerant consensus; explicit economic incentives are required if you don't want the system to develop out-of-protocol centralizing economics; etc.).
  - kyleyeats 3y ago
    So I'm just working on a CSS thing that barely qualifies as dweb. But the people I talk to that are into building solutions are well aware of the problems and tradeoffs. I don't disagree with your assessment. But the relearning is like our way of mining for genuinely new lessons. We're quixotic but totally self-aware about it.
specialist 3y ago
> might be generous and foster innovation during their growth stages, but then become extractive and limit innovation in later stages. Winner-takes-all is something like a law of nature. While I'm very pro-competition, trust busting (anti-monopoly), and nurturing young small businesses... I suspect that churn matters. Innovation and creativity requires the Powers That Be give the old ant farm a good shaking every few years. I have no idea what that'd look like. The only historical analogy I have are Debt Jubilees. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Debt_jubilee https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Debt_jubilee https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jubilee_(biblical) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jubilee_(biblical) Said another way... I'd be fine with maximally rights granting patents, all but sovereign corporate charters, and other final boss economic and political arrangements, provided that it all gets burned down every 7 years. The water bowl a good oxygenation for the gold fish to thrive.

wwweston 3y ago

I don't see hate for protocols or cryptography on HN. But I do see (a) skepticism about the actual decentralized (vs distributed) nature in practice (especially where the topic is financialized tech or even an end run around all the learning that's gone into the social codebase about finance). (b) realize that decentralization presented by things like the web are essentially "good enough" that capabilities are strong, personal or entrepreneurial latitude is pretty wide, and obstacles are few.

lazzlazzlazz 3y ago
EDIT: Thanks for this comment — I edited the original for clarity. I'm talking about crypto as in Ethereum, which are designed to resist centralization. HN wrongly thinks of crypto as a financial system (which it can do, for good and bad reasons thanks to its permissionlessness), instead of a family of methods for making composable, decentralized protocols with built-in economics (blockchains).
- TobyTheDog123 3y ago
  But why do these protocols need built-in economics? No user is going to want to have a wallet that slowly drains as they use the web -- it's just not convenient and will be thoroughly rejected by the mainstream. Compare this to something like torrenting - people give, people take. Sure, indexing is centralized, but once you have the index, it's all p2p. That's the direction decentralization should be taking, instead of the next generation of microtransactions where they're required for operation.
  - invalidOrTaken 3y ago
    >No user is going to want to have a wallet that slowly drains as they use the web -- it's just not convenient and will be thoroughly rejected by the mainstream. You don't need the mainstream, you just need the cool kids. The mainstream will follow---or not. As for why anyone would want this, there is a very compelling reason---no ads.
    - arsome 3y ago
      But I already have no ads and no payments, so no thanks.
  - theK 3y ago
    You now too have a wallet that slowly drains while you use the internet. Web3 wallets are just better integrated into it. Also, there is a misconception that the cryptocurrency based web is like dial up. It isn't. What it is is: 1. a way to decouple the ownership of the digital goods from the service that gave them to you 2. a way to actually do privacy preserving computing 3. an open layer to build added value things that can interact with assets and services others have created (think web2.0 in the bookmarklets era but your bookmarklets can talk with any site)

kyleyeats 3y ago

It's called dweb. Sometimes people do get it confused with 'web3' but that was just the name of the massive 2-billion-dollar shit a16z took on everything. Dwebcamp just extended ticket sales if you want to go talk to real dweb people: https://dwebcamp.org/ https://dwebcamp.org/

lazzlazzlazz 3y ago
I'm familiar with dweb, but it seems that they're just preparing to relearn the lessons of the early web (federation doesn't work; you need mechanisms to maintain Byzantine fault tolerant consensus; explicit economic incentives are required if you don't want the system to develop out-of-protocol centralizing economics; etc.).
- kyleyeats 3y ago
  So I'm just working on a CSS thing that barely qualifies as dweb. But the people I talk to that are into building solutions are well aware of the problems and tradeoffs. I don't disagree with your assessment. But the relearning is like our way of mining for genuinely new lessons. We're quixotic but totally self-aware about it.

specialist 3y ago

> might be generous and foster innovation during their growth stages, but then become extractive and limit innovation in later stages. Winner-takes-all is something like a law of nature. While I'm very pro-competition, trust busting (anti-monopoly), and nurturing young small businesses... I suspect that churn matters. Innovation and creativity requires the Powers That Be give the old ant farm a good shaking every few years. I have no idea what that'd look like. The only historical analogy I have are Debt Jubilees. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Debt_jubilee https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Debt_jubilee https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jubilee_(biblical) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jubilee_(biblical) Said another way... I'd be fine with maximally rights granting patents, all but sovereign corporate charters, and other final boss economic and political arrangements, provided that it all gets burned down every 7 years. The water bowl a good oxygenation for the gold fish to thrive.