Nice meme but pls
Removed by mod
deleted by creator
I hate the term Web3, the name itself feels like gaslighting. It tries to imply like it’s the next step for the web. It’s just grifting and is absolutely impractical lol.
Notice how Web3 blew up because of insane VC money, then suddenly dies what feels like overnight. They didn’t care about decentralization, otherwise they’d actually invest in non Blockchain bullshit. But then they can’t scam with crypto coins.
Because it fucking gaslighting. I remember having this WTF moment when I was reading the O’Reilly Ethereum programming book.
If web 2 was html 5 and css3, how does a protocol that relies solely on money being transacted make the basis of web3?
This sounds exactly like a VC plot. “There will be money exchanged on every transaction”. I bet they lost their minds in the pitch room when they heard it.
what if web3 is anonymous overlay networks like Tor hidden services? It a completely new concept to internet itself, and if directly implemented on hardware it will be true Web3
Why would you need to implement it directly on the hardware? Wouldn’t that hurt adoption? Something like Veilid seems like a way better option to me. It’s just a shame the documentation is so lacking (last time I checked).
but how do I give someone .0045 cents for no apparent reason??
GNU Taler. Ah, question was rhetorical :)
Really wish Taler to be available for use in the first country.
Me too, I really like the concept, also have demo-purchased by app with it. Hope it will become usable reality at some point.
This could be so awesome for electric scooters or anything tradicionally having coin insert.
Even if/when GNU Taler launches, somehow I don’t think the VC-backed app scooter companies are going to be adopting anonymous payments anytime soon.
Don’t forget about nfts there the future man they can’t be replicated man where can you spend 100k and by the end of the week your investment is worh $3.50
Where you spend 100k for a JPEG
Its not a jpeg man its an nft it uses blockchain man it can’t be replicated its totally the future now let me plug in 50 gpus I got to start mining
Its not a jpeg man its an nft it uses blockchain man it can’t be replicated its totally the future
It’s funny you say this because in the near future once blockchain usage becomes more mainstream, you’re going to see NFT tech used for things like concert tickets, sporting events, movie tickets etc… because they can’t be counterfeited and produced at a fraction of the cost of traditional tickets. As long as the NFT sits in your crypto wallet, you’re granted access to the event.
People tend to forget how much the original web was plagued with scams and such, or maybe some are too young to even know much about it… Crypto is new and will take some time before it matures. But I believe decentralization is the future and is one of the reasons I’m on Lemmy.
Crypto isn’t new. Bitcoin’s initial release was in 2009. Two versions of MS Windows have been released and EOL’d since then. Five Star Wars films have been written, filmed and released since then. Intel released all 13 generations of their Core i# processors since then.
NFTs weren’t created to be the proof of ownership of digital art, they just happen to be associated with that because that’s what the majority of them were created for.
The NFT isn’t the art that can be copy-pasted to any computer, it’s the proof of ownership. Criticizing them by saying “I can just download a copy of the picture!” is like saying copyrights are useless because you can use tools to rip movies from streaming services, sure you “own a copy”, it doesn’t make you a rightful owner of it from the perspective of the law.
But there worthless because digital art is intrinsically less valuable than real art
The intrinsic value of any art is what someone is willing to pay for it.
For example the world’s most expensive NFT, The Merge by Pak, sold for $91.8 million. Its price was higher than the sale of Jeff Koon’s Rabbit, the most expensive artwork by a living artist at auction. It’s all about personal tastes and how deep folks wanna dig in their pockets with this stuff.
Web 3.0 is the semantic web, and Web3 is the decentralized web. Those are essentially the definitions in their simplest terms.
I see some people considering these as separate things, but I never saw it that way. I’ve always felt that what we call Web 3.0 became the framework and foundational ideals for what grew into Web3.
Web 3.0 said, “let’s make everything machine-readable. let’s create parity between the physical and the digital.” The goal being to digitize the offline world so as to facilitate using the digital to support the physical.
But how do you do this? The more centralized a technology is, the less exposure it has to the wider world (with scale working to counteract the effect until a certain point). On the other hand if you decentralize the technology you can give it to everyone and let it be everywhere, and then use the decentralized network as the summed total potential for the platform.
Web3 is developing into this kind of technology. People started simple, recreating currencies like we use but digitally and decentralized, and then built ramps so that they could be converted to fiat and other goods and assets. Then the cloud storage concept was translated to a decentralized framework and we got IPFS. Then the currency tech was modified so that non-fungible assets could be delineated. This tied together blockchain and IPFS as a storage solution to allow blockchains to overcome bandwidth limitations.
Now we have people working on things like linking house titles to NFTs. Regardless of the how this would be used, I find that this is directly relevant to Web 3.0. More and more real-world objects are becoming digitized and machine-readable. Of course there are weaknesses in our current solutions: Lack of two-way functionality, limited decentralization of many databases & code, immature incentives for maintaining data integrity, limited polling ability for many data sets, and so on. But just because it isn’t perfect, doesn’t mean that it isn’t the semantic web. Web3 is what Web 3.0 looks like when it has come to life.
This causes me to consider the criticisms of Web3 in regards to Web 3.0. Some resistance is clearly due to the natural friction of new technologies being adopted by society. Some of it is also political, though - crypto and IPFS are often associated with the far-right, for example. Some of it is memetic transfer through social interactions which extends the discussion into communities that aren’t clearly identifiable stakeholders. Some comes from the authoritarian mindset, since these technologies enable dual power that is often discussed in the context of undermining states.
The criticism that I finding missing on Web3, is the Luddite criticism. We hear a lot of fear about AI making our jobs redundant. However I haven’t seen that same economic anxiety expressed around Web3 yet. Instead the major discussions (in terms of socioeconomic factors) seem to reflect a focus on “scams” and the idea that cryptos are “lottery tickets.” There also seems to be some schadenfreude, often targeted at the perception of well-to-do individuals investing their excess wealth and losing it quickly. But no objection from workers worried about becoming redundant. I do think the technology makes that possible in the big picture.
The web was always decentralized though. In fact Web 3 brought more centralization. Everything is in the cloud now, which is really just two or three main data center operators. That’s my techno luddite take.
Dumb take is dumb. Digital ownership is the “next” internet whether the bootlickers want it or not.
Blockchain is stupid and cryptocurrency is a scam.
Well, I guess I just used a „scam“ to pay for my VPN subscription. Later today, I will use another „scam“ to pay for my email service. Tomorrow I will use a „scam“ to pay for a VPS. Some day, I might use a „scam“ to rent a seedbox. So unfortunate that your so called „scam“ is actually usable to make payments online. In fact, those „scam“ payments are in some cases better, then‚ using a absolutely trustworthy credit card issued by a definitely trusted a reliable bank. Because banks never collapse and they never scam their customers. Such trustworthy multi-billion dollar corporations, I really don’t see a reason to distrust them. Depending on which “scam” you use, your payments are actually anonymous, just like cash. But the government and your bank don’t want you to use cash, because that way, they can’t track all of your transactions. They hand you a credit card, and they advertise it to you, and you actually start thinking that it is supposed to help you, while in reality it makes you a slave to the corporate and government-lead surveillance system. Fuck credit cards, fuck banks and payment providers, fuck central banks and governments. Use Monero and stay anonymous.
If Federation/Decentralization could be combined with decentralized crypto currency payments through something like Monero in a way that is not a scam, it would actually be great. We need some kind of monetization model for the Federated Web, and crypto currencies are actually great for that purpose but so far all implementations of this haven’t really worked or were just a scam.
