Web 3

What are your thoughts on Web3? I don't think i've seen a thread about this on here. I see alot of sites in these small webrings with blinkies saying "Keep the web free, say no to Web3" especially Yesterweb's webring The concept of a decentrilized web seems cool, but i don't trust no crypto-punk with a monkey pfp.

Web3 will be good for privacy and security. Those people are just spreading fud. Don't listen to them.

>>59872 Can you elaborate on that? Your use of "fud", a buzzword typical of the crypto financial cults, makes me want to disregard your post out of hand.

>>59871 For the past few centuries there's been an arms race between consumers and industry over shiny things. Consumers want to differentiate themselves by owning things, but as markets satisfy this need, the differentiating potential of owning that thing is lost. Ironically (being born out of cyberspace, the realm of infinite duplication) enough, NFTs (which would be inherent to a corporate Web3) and other cryptographic tokens are actually the last remaining scarce things, by design. Moreover, they cost next to nothing to "produce" - selling them is pure profit. It's consumer capitalism taken to the limit. I don't like that property very much. However, Web3 as I understand it would also solve link rot, which I think is dope as hell. .. Do I understand it? >decentralized web Do you mean "distributed" web? The web as is is already decentralized.

>>59871 I don't know how decentrilized web3 could be really. Judging by NFTs and all that the thing is decentrilize (in theory) but everyone just uses Opensea. The decentralization thing sounds more like a buzz word to me more than anything else. Also, I've heard a lot of things about it but the only clear thing is that you are going to basically paid for everything you do online wich that on it's own is like kicking dead whales down the beach really bad

>>59874 I don't like that very much either. The hyper-capitalistic nature of crypto and web3 doesn't seem sustainable. Solving linkrot would be cool tho Yes i meant distributed web

>>59889 I believe that the "hyper-capitalistic" nature that you're talking about is not exclusive to crypto and web3. It seems to often be a response to new technology in general (see the dot com boom). NFTs got a bad rep because of the stupid applications which people are falling for wasting away their money but I believe that the idea has some really good practical use. For example, think of software licenses. In many cases you can't own the program, only the license to use it. What if you could literally buy a copy of the program as an NFT? I'm personally excited for a distributed web considering how centralized it is becoming with things like AWS, azure, etc.

>>59871 people into NFT's only care about money, they don't even care about the art just the money, same with most popular crypto's and to my knowledge people just treat them as stock which can be heavily manipulated. monero seemed interesting because it seems first to be an actually secure way of transferring money to me but it also Plummeted cause of crypto bros in conclusion, crypto good for secure money transferring (don't wanna put debit cards everywhere) but how it's treated by the majority ruined it but they'll get bored and we can reclaim it then

Isn't web 3.0 when there is a phone app for everything, rather than a lot of websites you visit through the same browser? In other words, what they already have.

>>59900 Crypto is not money and the lesson you should be learning from this spectacular instability is that anything that isn't money is just another commodity to be speculated upon. If you want to transfer money securely, use GNU Taler.

>>59871 The problem with most critiques of crypto is that they can also be applied to the things crypto aims to replace. One of the main points of that Yesterweb article is "It’s impossible to fully understand without complex technological and financial knowledge", and everything they mention can also be applied to the US dollar. "It caters to early adopters and whales"---so does the stock market. 'There are scams in the crypto community'---there are scams in traditional systems. Basically the Yesterweb article says crypto is an investment, and proceeds to critique investments. They are essentially technological conservatives* who are critiquing the new thing, even though the old thing has all the same problems. Realistically the problem is that the economy is fake. Crypto by its nature is more difficult (though not impossible) to fake, and so is a better option than the bloated financial system we have currently. The lesser of two evils. I have this conspiracy theory that a lot of anti-crypto stuff is done by paid actors, because there are a lot of people who would lose a lot of power if crypto were adopted en mass. Perhaps that's not true, but the fact remains that they constantly use articles from the legacy media, famous for their constant defence of the powerful, to back up their points. * I would rather live in a technologically conservative world. However, conditions have changed since the 90s. There is no going back---we must live in the reality we've been given, and steer it best we can.

>>59903 >use GNU Taler sounds interesting, don't fully understand it though but thanks for telling me about it

>>59903 stable depends on timeframe you look at. crypto was longterm more stable than fiat. Your fiat decreased with inflation yearly. Crypto went up accommodating for that. Even at 50% fluctuation you get more out of btc / eth than if you held to usd / € /... for a decade.

>>59909 should add my only problem with crypto is its inherently insecure at user level. Its too easy to lose your account or fuarrrk up destination sending money irrevocable into the void.

>>59902 Web3 now basically means apps ran on distributed networks that are tied to cryptocurrency. Advocates claim that this will allow people who host dApps to fund them without running advertisements or collecting user data, but generally these dApps do not have anonymity built in and tie your account to your public key in the blockchain, in which smart contracts are handling much of the application logic, which makes for less privacy as anyone can look at the blockchain and see who has been doing what.

>The problem with most critiques of crypto is that they can also be applied to the things crypto aims to replace. Well yeah, there's no reason to replace something if the thing you are replacing it has next to no benefit and just adds complexity. And let's be honest, the real reason crypto is actually talked about, is because they hope more people will use it so that early adopters can get more money out of it. The whole thing is essentially seen as "get rich quick" scheme, which should raise eyebrows to anyone with two neurons. Which is just funny when people talk about as if this was some revolutionary change in economy, when it's essentially most of the time digitally simulated gold standard that any state can just abandon when it wants. >They are essentially technological conservatives This is just dumb. I remember when technology meant exciting and meaningful things. Like sending people to space, making sure we don't have to work a lot, improving our health. In the last decades, the so called technological advancement is pretty much larp. We essentially are paying billions so that people can figure how to sell everything of our existence. We have apps that follow skinner-like design making sure to make you miserable so that you spend more time on apps making parasocial relationships which will never fullfill you. We have apps like uber, which essentially scam people in thinking they own their business while they are just working for some megacorp for less than an employee would make. We have these dating apps which essentially reduce people's relationships to scrolling up and down other's pictures, and now we have this fuarrrking speculation that literally just tries to remake the old with new coat of paint. But I guess "progress" is progress, and if you disagree with that you are luddite or something. Even someone like me who would want nothing more than to live in a sci-fi novel. >because there are a lot of people who would lose a lot of power if crypto were adopted en mass. Yes, that's why we have Elon Musk and Zuck pushing for it. The most anti-authority figures I can think of.

>>59919 meant for >>59904

>>59909 >crypto was longterm more stable than fiat. Willful ignorance or just a straight up lie in desperation, I can't even tell the difference anymore.