Web3.0 Must Be Destroyed (opens in new tab)

A lot of people don't like these new financial toys like NFTs and tokens. But to say "they should be destroyed" seems... extreme? Just let nerds do their thing online. I don't tell furries to go fuck off because I find their subculture objectionable.

> The thing here that NFTs references an asset.

I find this part amusing. It makes me wonder if it is even possible to actually plagiarize an NFT. Like, sure if you copy a picture shown in an NFT, reupload it and wrap it in a new NFT, that's plaigarism, but the way around that is even simpler! Just deploy the new NFT and reference the location of the existing picture! If people are willing to purchase your NFT anyway, who cares?

Its like buying a picture frame, holding it up over your face and looking through it to a picture hung 5 feet away. If people are willing to pay for that, then sell picture frames. NFT are the picture frames.

The difference is that I find it merely amusing, while this person finds it like their missionary duty to stop the practice. But why? Who cares? The contract address of the digital picture frame is different and can't be plaigarized, its up to the consumer to discern. If consumers don't want to..... then sell digital picture frames!

There are overlapping similarities to a selling a TV as well, or cable box, you can set the channel to one thing elsewhere, or you can change the channel. NFTs are the TV or cable box here.

I think the most similarities would be like those digital photo frames you can buy at stores, the ones w/ tiny android computers in them that show a digital photo that you set. That's the NFT, except the NFT is completely digital, so its more akin to a digital digital photo frame.

Maybe Matt Levine could write it that way and more people would get it that way. But maybe you're already perceiving the world correctly, congratulations, you perceive the world correctly. The market is saying sell those, so sell those.

> what happens when BTC does reach 100k? — presumably most will sell including the grifters in Miami, Dubai and so on

LOL – if you think this is true, you don't know anything about greed or emotions. (To be a bit less obscurant, I'm saying they are both either boundless or unquantifiable. There's nothing special about 100K btc, nothing more special than 69K USD BTC.)

There's no need for action, just wait it out.

The "stable" coins used to route around US laws are starting to lose their peg. When Tether goes, it'll all drop at least 90%, if not 99.95%, as all the margins on the offshore exchanges get called.

> Newer revisions of the tech, such as Algorand, may have promise and deal with some of the issues I mentioned.

So as long was we have Meta [0], Stripe [1], Signal [2] and others [3], [4] are still using them, it is NOT going to be 100% guaranteed to be destroyed and totally going away then?

The die hard anti-crypto extreme who think it will be totally completely and totally destroyed are just as wrong as the religious crypto maximalists who think all projects are going to succeed to the moon.

Don't be either of them.

[0] https://techcrunch.com/2022/05/09/instagram-testing-nfts-sel...

[1] https://stripe.com/blog/expanding-global-payouts-with-crypto

[2] https://support.signal.org/hc/en-us/articles/360057625692-In...

[3] https://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/ukraine-electronic-...

[4] https://ir.moneygram.com/news-releases/news-release-details/...

"What I don't like must be destroyed."

I hate cancel culture even more than web3.

> 2) no one spends BTC

I'm awfully tired of these completely misinformed blog posts that seem to reflect HN's collective delusion about bitcoin. I don't know about US, but the whole drug trade, from the largest transactions to street level, have transitioned to crypto in Eastern Europe and at least few Middle Eastern countries. More and more of my friends who have never been interested in crypto as a ponzi scheme are using USDT to send and receive money across borders as their banks are hit with sanctions.

If you don't see something, it doesn't mean that it doesn't exist.

So the author registered this "webtwoboomer.com" domain and says their mission is "Poisoning my brain with web3 so you don’t have to." Skepticism is fine, but the bias is cringe. I can't see what value the author is adding to a thoughtful discussion, these web3 antagonists always think they are making some great points that no one has considered, but they aren't and they have a hard time moving past it. I don't see the value in this biased blog.

That was the least technical analysis on web3, just a rant. The guy is like... DAO can only be wrapped in a corporation... Have you heard of Cooperative business structures where each employee have an equal vote and own the business?

Same with Authentication... The idea of web3 is decentralisation... Once the app is operational, there are no more server fees. It's always online - heard of arwave?

Web3 is not crypto man...

Web3 is a design blueprint that is based on decentralised databases, decentralised Auth and decentralised payments and decentralised storage.

It is way harder to implement web3 solutions today than web2. Travel back in 2002 at the early days of web2, and look at how miserable it was to create a webapp.

There are actually no valid point, the guy doesn't even go technical, while talking about a technical subject- and the read is not short.

The concept of web3 is that no more dependencies on AWS, Azure and cloud premises- which are all controlled by govt.

Tor is Free??? What? Please share your server provider... As far as I know, you still have to host your TOR website on a physical server, and pay for it. Ahah. Maybe you talk about access? Well ipfs is free, arwave is free and Ethereum is free then.

This article is a piece of opinionated incompetent crap written in good English.

Agreed.

The political foundations that have permeated its design are intolerable alone. Austrian School, "sound money," economics put the liberty of the individual above that of society. The entire community walks and talks like a fascist movement: they celebrate masculinity and "strong leaders," authoritarianism and oligarchy, they see themselves as superior and righteous, and above the law. It's the preferred way to fund blockades, white nationalist movements, etc.

Let alone that the technology is hot garbage and shouldn't even be out of the prototype stage. Hasn't your mother taught you not to eval a strangers code on your computer? Well that's what a smart contract does and it handles financial assets too. If you can read and understand proofs the attempts to formalize these machines have produced reams and reams of theorems and work in order to try and make this safe(r)... yet hackers continue to siphon off trillions of dollars in attack after attack. If the proof is so complex that you can't understand it then it's a sign your sniffing down the wrong path.

But that doesn't even matter. Most of web3 tech is only good enough to pull off the grift. I suspect that's why most scammers have moved on to target holders of cryptoassets rather than old folks and banks: it's easier, less risky, and way more profitable. So go ahead, spend 20k and invest in an NFT and flex on all your socials. If you have already I guarantee you're on someone's list.

If you're interested in following along with how much money has been lost, stolen, scammed, and simply disappeared: https://web3isgoinggreat.com

I tried to make it through the article, but I bailed about halfway through, and skimmed the rest.

I’m having trouble buying into the sentiment. It seems like just a big long negative rant about Bitcoin, NFTs, & crypto/ blockchain in general. Kind of just rehashing all the typical straw man criticisms of ‘crypto bros’ or early adopters.

While these things are an aspect of Web 3.0, they are not the end all be all. There was no mention of other decentralized technologies. Things like Mastodon or Matrix. There is a huge selection of self-hostable, decentralized software projects available to us now. Nextcloud might be another good example.

The point is we want to move away from highly centralized closed source services, that track our every move for profit, and we have no recourse over if something goes bad. We want to embrace open source, freely available software that we are in full control of. Web 3.0 is more than just crypto currency.

I think the title of this would make more sense if it said, “Cryptocurrency & Blockchain Must Be Destroyed”.

If you like this kind of topic Luke Smith's work might interest you... https://www.youtube.com/c/LukeSmithxyz

Talks a lot about RSS, simple/minimalist websites, decentralization, fediverse, linux etc.

This "isn't even wrong."[0]

Users should own their own data, period.

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Not_even_wrong

>web3 is a culmination of late capitalist grift, ironic meming, libertarianism and mansplaining, all resting on bad tech that is damaging the planet ... Proof of Stake is an alternative to validating transactions that doesn’t involve setting fire to the earth

The very first sentence of this piece is dishonest: blanketly condemning "all" related tech as environmentally devastating. Later on in the piece it's admitted that innovations like Proof of Stake solve the problem of needless energy consumption.

>To actually use this stuff is quite difficult, even the most simple thing, like buying something.

Yeah, scanning a QR code with your phone - as one needs to do to buy something online with a mobile wallet - is super hard. ;)

This article seems to be a cavalcade of shallow and dishonest criticism.

There's still self hosting.

Stopped reading at "mansplaining".