4 ms·

web1 = read web2 = read/write web3 = read/write/own

SV_BubbleTime 3y ago
Seems a little more like: - It takes some knowledge to post - It takes too little knowledge to post - It takes money to do anything
bruce511 3y ago
Not sure why you're getting downvoted. Sure it's not completely accurate but it does embody the "spirit" I think. I know, you could do writes with Web 1, so it's imperfect, but since that imperfection carries on to Web 3, I kinda like it. In its "wrongness" it kinda suggests it's not that simple. Web 3 might be "own" - but the -value- of what you own is questionable. There might be things of value in there, but if there is it's well hidden by the crap. "Web with blockchain" doesn't seem like a useful improvement over "Web without block chain" [1]. So I like your summary. It begs the question "own what?" Which in turn kinda answers the Web 3 question in a nutshell. [1] apart from criminal activity, clearly the killer-app for crypto, the block-chain is useful for time-stamping things. It can be used to prove that say a piece of music existed at a specific point in time. Which could be useful in copyright questions. Granted, this is an astonishingly niche case though.
- kodapoda 3y ago
  The time-stamping use case you describe is basically non-existent. Even light media like images are not stored on-chain 99.99% of the time. Time-stamping a URL to an audio track that is hosted on a server you own is not in itself a prove of the existence of this copyrighted material. I have seen interesting on-chain visual experiments (generative animation fully stored on-chain) but that trend seems to have faded under the pressure of the NFT monetization spike+burst.
  - oasisaimlessly 3y ago
    You don't have to store the data on-chain. Simply storing a cryptographically-secure hash of the data is sufficient to attest its existence.
- EMM_386 3y ago
  Interesting how that was exactly my thought process. I asked the original question, read that response, and then moved almost immediately to ask "own what?". I really wanted to know, as those details are important. Decided against it, read your response, and saw "begs the question". Yes, it does. I hope that "NFT"s are not something used as an example in an answer.
kodapoda 3y ago
The "own" part is a fantasy. Fractional tokens of the world's grain resources, on-chain video hosting, a global decentralized currency exchange, etc... none of that really scaled. Having a secret key to a wallet is not more "ownership" in practical terms than having a bank account with an ID and a password. The way I understand web3, is that its key promise was to create a trustless global digital environment. Technologically speaking, it works to a large degree. Pragmatically—I don't think it's top of mind for the vast majority of people, including most (ex)web3 advocates.

Seems a little more like: - It takes some knowledge to post - It takes too little knowledge to post - It takes money to do anything

bruce511 3y ago

Not sure why you're getting downvoted. Sure it's not completely accurate but it does embody the "spirit" I think. I know, you could do writes with Web 1, so it's imperfect, but since that imperfection carries on to Web 3, I kinda like it. In its "wrongness" it kinda suggests it's not that simple. Web 3 might be "own" - but the -value- of what you own is questionable. There might be things of value in there, but if there is it's well hidden by the crap. "Web with blockchain" doesn't seem like a useful improvement over "Web without block chain" [1]. So I like your summary. It begs the question "own what?" Which in turn kinda answers the Web 3 question in a nutshell. [1] apart from criminal activity, clearly the killer-app for crypto, the block-chain is useful for time-stamping things. It can be used to prove that say a piece of music existed at a specific point in time. Which could be useful in copyright questions. Granted, this is an astonishingly niche case though.

kodapoda 3y ago
The time-stamping use case you describe is basically non-existent. Even light media like images are not stored on-chain 99.99% of the time. Time-stamping a URL to an audio track that is hosted on a server you own is not in itself a prove of the existence of this copyrighted material. I have seen interesting on-chain visual experiments (generative animation fully stored on-chain) but that trend seems to have faded under the pressure of the NFT monetization spike+burst.
- oasisaimlessly 3y ago
  You don't have to store the data on-chain. Simply storing a cryptographically-secure hash of the data is sufficient to attest its existence.
EMM_386 3y ago
Interesting how that was exactly my thought process. I asked the original question, read that response, and then moved almost immediately to ask "own what?". I really wanted to know, as those details are important. Decided against it, read your response, and saw "begs the question". Yes, it does. I hope that "NFT"s are not something used as an example in an answer.

kodapoda 3y ago

The "own" part is a fantasy. Fractional tokens of the world's grain resources, on-chain video hosting, a global decentralized currency exchange, etc... none of that really scaled. Having a secret key to a wallet is not more "ownership" in practical terms than having a bank account with an ID and a password. The way I understand web3, is that its key promise was to create a trustless global digital environment. Technologically speaking, it works to a large degree. Pragmatically—I don't think it's top of mind for the vast majority of people, including most (ex)web3 advocates.