• StarManta@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    109
    arrow-down
    10
    ·
    11 months ago

    Trying to claim the term “Web3” is a futile battle. It is already widely understood to mean crypto and blockchain. If I see a job posting that says the company is built on Web3, I know immediately that the job is built on scams and grifts without having to ask further questions. Web3 as a term is ruined already.

    For this to work it must be a different term than Web3. Maybe “Web 3.0” is different enough?

      • Feddyteddy@lemmy.sdf.org
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        23
        arrow-down
        16
        ·
        11 months ago

        The only people that think this is correct are ones that learned about crypto 5 years ago and never thought to update their information. The lightning network allows for tiny bitcoin transactions with sub one cent transaction fees. In addition to that, the transactions happen in less than a second.

        • TheOneCurly@lemmy.theonecurly.page
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          13
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          11 months ago

          As long as you have a channel with that person preconfigured and funded right? Otherwise you need to do an on chain transaction with on chain fees to set up that sub one cent transaction.

          • Feddyteddy@lemmy.sdf.org
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            4
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            11 months ago

            No. I have opened up exactly 1 channel with 1 other person years ago, and it was done automatically when I installed the app. Since then I have been able to send and receive bitcoin to anyone I’ve wanted to instantly and for a miniscule fraction of the amount that I have sent. I am really surprised, I had no idea that so much misinformation was being passed around amongst people who have never even decided to try it themselves or even look into it deeply at all.

        • Kecessa@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          9
          arrow-down
          10
          ·
          edit-2
          11 months ago

          It’s also centralized and just a bandaid over an issue that could have been solved if Bitcoin had stayed true to its original intention, i.e. digital cash, not a fake store of value.

          • Feddyteddy@lemmy.sdf.org
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            4
            arrow-down
            4
            ·
            11 months ago

            This is absurd. Anyone who has the slightest idea of how it works knows that it is in no way centralized. It isn’t hard to learn how it works.

                • Kecessa@sh.itjust.works
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  arrow-down
                  6
                  ·
                  11 months ago

                  Oh sorry if I don’t keep up to date to the daily movement of Bitcoin… I mean, I wouldn’t have because it’s a store of value and the basic principle of a store of value is the ability to use it and be guaranteed to have what you put in or close to it…

                • Kecessa@sh.itjust.works
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  arrow-down
                  2
                  ·
                  11 months ago

                  So is saying that everyone who bought Bitcoin cash lost money considering today isn’t all time low.

                  It’s not as if I was here to defend Bitcoin cash, I’m here to point out that Bitcoin and lighting network is flawed though.

            • Kecessa@sh.itjust.works
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              4
              ·
              11 months ago

              At least Bitcoin cash stayed true to the goal of Bitcoin. A peer-to-peer electronic cash system.

              • explodicle@local106.com
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                3
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                11 months ago

                That was also untrue. Electronic cash doesn’t imply no/low transaction fees. Basically everything they told you was a lie.

                • Kecessa@sh.itjust.works
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  3
                  arrow-down
                  2
                  ·
                  11 months ago

                  Show me where in the whitepaper does it mentions storing value, please.

                  No/low transaction fees and ease of transaction is the main point of cash vs barter, Bitcoin abandoned that, now you have to go through the trouble of using level 2 to have small fees and quick transactions, what’s the point of Bitcoin then?

        • marv99@feddit.de
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          11 months ago

          Me too, I really like the concept, also have demo-purchased by app with it. Hope it will become usable reality at some point.

            • Arthur Besse@lemmy.mlM
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              10 months ago

              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.

  • Bappity@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    49
    arrow-down
    13
    ·
    edit-2
    11 months ago

    it’s insulting to consider cryptocurrency or blockchain as any kind of next generation thing

      • SomeAmateur@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        14
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        edit-2
        11 months ago

        To me it feels like how 3D tvs were. Cool tech but not enough people hopping on board to make it mainstream so it stagnates and fizzles out. I could be wrong of course

    • Decompose@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      39
      ·
      11 months ago

      Oh, yes. Good luck preserving the value you spent your life creating in your cash/fiat money while the printer goes brrrr. When bank bail-in happens to bail out the rich, I’ll be laughing my *** off. I bet you don’t even know what bail-in means. It basically means the banks will take your money to bail themselves out, like Cyprus in 2010s. It’s the plan if a crisis happens. Read about it.

      Also, I hope you enjoy the social credit system after Central Bank Digital Currency becomes a normal thing, and then be cut off the financial system for being a “bad boy” with a press of a button. Today Nigel Farage is the bad boy, tomorrow it’s you (but you’re good boy, aren’t you?).

      Your corrupt politicians can’t pry my cryptocurrency out of me even if they wanted to. They won’t even know how much I have. I can, on spot, drop everything and leave to a new country when things get bad (they never do, now do they? I gotta stop with the conspiracies… things are perfect)

      Chickens will come home to roost. I guess we all pay for our decisions after all. That’s what life is about. That’s why I care not when people lose their life savings because they trust governments. They chose that.

      • ZodiacSF1969@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        25
        ·
        11 months ago

        Your corrupt politicians can’t pry my cryptocurrency out of me even if they wanted to.

        All they need is a $5 wrench lol

        • toomanyjoints69
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          5
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          11 months ago

          Monero is an ok cyrptocurrency because its not designed to make you money. Its designed to launder money and buy illegal things. Its useful if youre trans and live in Florida where hormones will be illegal.

          Anyone who thinks crypto will replace money is high. The problem with capitalism isnt money. You cant fix it by inventing different money.

        • Decompose@programming.dev
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          12
          ·
          11 months ago

          Of course you won’t… why would you? Enjoy being a poor slave. That’s what you guys do. Never read.

      • toomanyjoints69
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        8
        ·
        11 months ago

        I feel like maybe you could have been more hostile. Why dont you try again, and really let it out this time!

      • regalia@literature.cafe
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        11 months ago

        Crypto bros love to bring up CBDC, like we don’t have a centralized banking system with credit cards already lol. I wonder if you’re libertarian!

  • regalia@literature.cafe
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    36
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    11 months ago

    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.

    • Gnubyte@lemdit.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      10
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      11 months ago

      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.

    • qaz@lemmy.worldOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      11 months ago

      VC’s are where the hype is, all those AI companies will disappear too when the AI hype dies.

      • regalia@literature.cafe
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        11 months ago

        And that’s the circle of silicon valley. AI with last longer though, it has actual practical applications and already is generating a ton of money. It’ll start to die down once more people realize that its hallucinations kill a lot of its applications, which we’ll need another technology breakthrough for that. It’s a problem that’s possible to solve though. I just hope for the collapse of OpenAI.

        • qaz@lemmy.worldOP
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          11 months ago

          Certainly, that’s why I said AI hype. Machine learning is already invaluable in many fields. Its ability to generate new content, is certainly not flawless, but already has some uses. I just hope that the hype dies down and companies stop putting pointless and flawed AI integration in their products to please investors.

  • The dogspaw @midwest.social
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    27
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    11 months ago

    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

    • Kecessa@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      10
      arrow-down
      6
      ·
      11 months ago

      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.

      • qaz@lemmy.worldOP
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        14
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        11 months ago

        NFT’s also don’t implicitly make you the rightfull owner. The basketball NFT’s content still explicitly belongs to the seller. The only true way for NFT’s to work for digital content is to have a contract that specifically states that the NFT proves ownership, but you might as well write it directly in the contract at that point.

        • Somerefriedbeans@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          4
          ·
          11 months ago

          This specifically depends on the project producing the NFTs. Some grant full ownership while some do not.

          • dsemy@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            8
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            11 months ago

            That’s his point - NFTs don’t actually solve any problem here, they just add an extra step.

            • Somerefriedbeans@lemmy.ca
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              arrow-down
              3
              ·
              11 months ago

              I fail to understand your point. What extra step? You either get ownership or you don’t based on the asset you’ve acquired. NFTs don’t have alto be a once size fits all kind of thing. You are just oversimplifying it. The same can work for physical objects that you purchase. Vehicle manufacturers make it to where you can’t service your own vehicle sometimes because of special tools needed… So do you really own it? Hmmmm

              • dsemy@lemm.ee
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                5
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                11 months ago

                I buy a picture from you, I get a receipt proving I bought it.

                I buy a picture from you on an NFT marketplace, I get an NFT proving I bought it.

                What value does an NFT provide in this case? I guess it provides a better proof of the purchase but that hardly seems worth the effort of setting up a wallet and acquiring crypto (for the average person at least). Not to mention the seller also needs to do these things, and I fail to see how he will benefit in this case.

                Maybe in a hypothetical world where everyone uses crypto this will make more sense.

                • Somerefriedbeans@lemmy.ca
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  ·
                  11 months ago

                  I’ll just use a small example… Let’s say you have an NFT for a online casino project. Simply holding the nft in your wallet will give you a weekly payout (certain percentage of profits for that week/month)

                  I use this example because nfts can have many different uses. Another would be gated communities/gated access to online services. Hope that helps it make sense a little

                • NecroSocial@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  11 months ago

                  I buy a picture from you on an NFT marketplace, I get an NFT proving I bought it. What value does an NFT provide in this case?

                  In this case, assuming you’re a trader in this example, you’d be banking on whatever art you purchased to gain further value so you can then sell your certificate of ownership and make a profit. This is no different than art sales/trades IRL. Here’s an art gallery owner discussing using NFTs as certificates of ownership for real world art sales and the added benefits over traditional COOs.

        • NecroSocial@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          11 months ago

          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.

  • WolfhoundRO@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    21
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    11 months ago

    I would see that crypto and blockchain scam as more like the last breath of Web2, given the monetization thing

    • AeonFelis@lemmy.world
      cake
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      24
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      11 months ago

      No. Web2 is about user generated content (as opposed to the static pages of Web1) - crapto stuff hardly fits the bill. Like it or not, it really does belong to Web3 - which is about decentralization.

    • wildbus8979@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      10 months ago

      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.

  • MrSlicer@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    9
    ·
    11 months ago

    Federation was we 1.0 people forget all major chatting services used to be integrated. You could have a yahoo im show up on your aim chatbox.

  • Phegan@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    11 months ago

    I’ve been calling it web 1.5. It feels a lot like the web before web 2.0, but leverages improvements in technology and knowledge since then