[HN Gopher] TBD Web5
___________________________________________________________________
TBD Web5
Author : hi
Score : 36 points
Date : 2022-06-10 17:50 UTC (5 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (developer.tbd.website)
(TXT) w3m dump (developer.tbd.website)
| uptown wrote:
| I'm holding out for Web8.
| lukifer wrote:
| In the spirit of Asimov's Zeroth Law, I think it's time for the
| prequel, Web0 (since we all know zero-indexing is objectively
| correct). Bring back the simple purity of Usenet and BBS:
| everything that's old is new again ;)
| boffinism wrote:
| The Ocho.
| NotSammyHagar wrote:
| Web Ocho Cinko? Must be Friday afternoon.
| vittore wrote:
| or web10 :shrug:
| michaelsbradley wrote:
| Interesting! Seems to have a fair bit of crossover with what the
| Fission team is doing. Yesterday I stumbled upon a web page re: a
| presentation that a key Fission dev/founder (former Ethereum Core
| Dev) will be making in late September[1].
|
| I ended up spending some time playing with Fission Drive[2] and
| looking at their Guide[3], and just generally reading their
| dev[4] and marketing materials[5].
|
| Anyway, looking at the Web5 site, it seem to strike some of the
| same notes.
|
| I'm not affiliated with or participating in Fission or the Web5
| projects in any way, but am working as part of a different team
| developing an open protocol for decentralized storage, which is
| focused on incentivized data durability.
|
| [1] https://www.thestrangeloop.com/2022/a-distributed-file-
| syste...
|
| [2] https://drive.fission.codes/
|
| [3] https://guide.fission.codes/
|
| [4] https://github.com/fission-suite
|
| [5] https://fission.codes/
| 2pEXgD0fZ5cF wrote:
| Is this satire? I honestly can't tell anymore with projects
| surrounding cryptocurrencies.
| anonporridge wrote:
| The project is serious, but the name is making fun of Web3.
| zorlack wrote:
| (web2)(web3) = (web5)
|
| (web)(2)(web)(3) = (web)(5)
|
| [SNIP]
|
| (web) = (5/6)
|
| Nailed it.
|
| Er.. Or web = 0.
|
| Hmm.
| NotSammyHagar wrote:
| Woah woah woah! You can't just blow right past web 4. Unless
| you are following the rule that all web versions must be prime
| numbers. Then it's okay.
| asojfdowgh wrote:
| All I can say is... I've seen it all before now? on "web2",
| nothing ever prevented someone using cert/key based auth, and
| there were libraries to abstract over proprietary APIs, but if
| you didn't want to go that way, there is also
| https://remotestorage.io/ et al
|
| biggest hugest problem though: no one cares, go ask your mom
| about the difference between web1, 2, and 3
| lukifer wrote:
| Setting aside the arbitrary fuzziness of the "WebN" labels, Web
| 2.0 addressed two clear shortcomings of the WWW stack: (1) no
| protocols for persistent user identity, and (2) no protocols
| for value transfer.
|
| The trade-off of the 2.0 era was (is): solving those required
| out-sourcing to private, pseudo-feudal institutions:
| Google/Facebook/etc in the first case, PayPal/Venmo/etc in the
| second. (One could argue that WWW did in fact have affordances
| to make this possible, in the form of cookies and SSL; but the
| point is, those affordances were insufficient on their own,
| requiring integration with centralized "cloud" providers, and
| in the case of value transfer, central banks as well.)
|
| The alleged intent of "web3" is to address these shortcomings
| in a user-sovereign, platform-native way. No doubt, a huge
| number of projects operating in the space are glorified rug-
| pulls and Ponzi schemes; I don't blame skeptics at all,
| considering the history of moral hazards, perverse incentives,
| and blatant scams in crypto-economics. All the same, I wouldn't
| write off the category wholesale; there are some fascinating
| things happening in non-blockchain FOSS projects [0], voluntary
| creation of public goods [1], and community revivification of
| the Commons [2].
|
| [0] https://taler.net/en/index.html
|
| [1] https://commonsstack.org/
|
| [2] https://commonsengine.org/
| madrox wrote:
| We're going to keep doing Web++ until we learn to stop worrying
| and love the mess that is online identity. The fact is that the
| distributed data model will never be clean because, in aggregate,
| people don't really care and don't neatly fit into the structures
| engineers want to impose on data. This is why experience started
| winning the app wars.
| cyanydeez wrote:
| No worries. Once the numbers get to big, they just switch to
| years or whatever.
|
| If you're old enough to remember windows 2000
| cookiengineer wrote:
| Fun fact: windows 95 and 98 are the reason why it is Windows
| 10 and not 9.
|
| Cause you know, kernel_version.startsWith("9") and good old
| programming methodologies.
| Dylan16807 wrote:
| That's a fake fact. The number windows exposes doesn't work
| that way and also pretends to be an older version to older
| programs. Some people pointed at java code doing something
| _like_ that, but that code never would have failed either.
| lwansbrough wrote:
| All of this stuff is built upon the premise that decentralization
| is a good thing, but I have yet to see much supporting evidence.
| I do however see a ton of evidence to the contrary.
|
| (I see centralization as more like clustering than a unifying of
| everything.)
|
| Decentralization happens in the real world out of necessity, not
| because it's preferred. In fact, we centralize everything that is
| convenient to centralize because of its efficiency. And
| decentralization tends to occur at the boundaries of cooperation,
| where the problems lie.
|
| So why would I want enforced decentralization when doing so would
| be inconvenient or inefficient?
| [deleted]
| michaelsbradley wrote:
| Centralization can lead to inefficiencies and ineffectiveness
| (and other problems) at large scales.
|
| It _is_ possible to have strong hierarchical authority and
| decentralized decision-making work together over the long haul,
| to alleviate those obstacles, even if the two bump heads on
| occasion:
|
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Subsidiarity_(Catholicism)
| axg11 wrote:
| Agreed that the current (incorrect) web3 narrative is that all
| decentralization is good. There will be use cases where it's
| good and use cases where it's bad. The process to a valuable
| endpoint will involve a lot of duds and failed companies.
| vittore wrote:
| only question I have, is the next version going to be web8 or
| web10?
| etchalon wrote:
| This idea depends on two non-starters:
|
| 1. A completely centralized data authority (in this case,
| Bitcoin). 2. User's running their own infrastructure.
|
| "Put everything in one giant bucket, and make users 100%
| responsible for managing that bucket without any room for error"
| is not a workable path forward.
|
| Developers may love this type of approach, and appreciate the
| advantages it would offer, but it's too much to ask of my 70 year
| old mom or 11 year old nephew.
|
| An easier approach would be Passkeys and localStorage
| transferability between domains, or export feature on sites.
| [deleted]
| ourmandave wrote:
| _Developers may love this type of approach, and appreciate the
| advantages it would offer,..._
|
| Like all the roll-your-own security success stories. =D
| axg11 wrote:
| It takes a lot to look past the branding, but I think the vision
| is interesting. I think there _will_ be more personal ownership
| of data in the future, but not across all services.
| Decentralized, permissionless self-custody data only makes sense
| for narrow use cases.
| lottin wrote:
| No, it's just technobabble. Personal ownership of data? What is
| that? What do they mean by ownership of data? Like,
| intellectual property? DRM? What exactly? They don't know,
| because it doesn't matter, because it's just meaningless words
| that are intended to sound empowering. All web3/web5 promoters
| care about is that we buy their worthless, useless tokens. They
| can stick them where the sun don't shine!
| Semiapies wrote:
| Yup. Time to close the HN tab for the week.
| collaborative wrote:
| Anyone else loves the UI or is it just me?
| tiffanyh wrote:
| Reminds of WinAmp 5.x, since they went from v3 straight to v5
| (the best if v2 + v3 = v5)
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2022-06-10 23:01 UTC)