Are cryptocurrencies a real danger to regular currencies? Are NFTs a real danger to tangible items? Are DAOs a real danger to actual corporations? I'd answer all of those questions with a hard NO.
But the climate and energy impact is not that easy to set aside. The article itself mentions one of the many consequences could be flooding the termination points for underwater sea fiber. So while web3 isn't a threat to the web itself by superseeding it, it's a threat to its existence (and a whole lot of other existences).
But Bitcoin is definitely not useless. I can use it to buy drugs, guns, child porn and other important commodities.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/haileylennon/2021/01/19/the-fal...
Who is this "you all" to whom you're referring?
I'm not "terrified" of cryptocurrency. No, I won't buy guns or child porn with it, but probably drugs. And that's a good thing.
>I'm not sure what you're trying to achieve
I achieved exactly what I attempted: to reply to the parent[0] of my comment with my thoughts.
Do you suspect that I have some nefarious goal to destroy blockchains/cryptocurrencies through tongue-in-cheek replies on HN? If so, that seems a little paranoid. But I don't judge.
Please carry on.
I get it, this is just a deep thread with a one-off comment, not the biggest deal, but it's certainly annoying trying to attempt honest conversation about crypto with comments like this.
But those are documented use cases for cryptocurrency. If you don't approve of such things, so be it. It doesn't invalidate other uses (hodling, etc.) for cryptocurrency (in this particular case, Bitcoin).
>I get it, this is just a deep thread with a one-off comment, not the biggest deal, but it's certainly annoying trying to attempt honest conversation about crypto with comments like this.
Now I'm confused. Firstly, this was (I thought) a thread about the (non)uses of Web3, not cryptocurrencies or blockchains in general.
I'm sorry my assessment of the consumer uses of Bitcoin rankles you. That said, Bitcoin is used for some "unsavory" stuff isn't news, nor is it (as you pointed out) specific to Bitcoin.
Please do carry on, as it's your best bet to counter my evil plot to destroy Crypto/blockchain with occasional HN comments, in my grand plan for world domination.
If those infrequent (primarily because this isn't a primary interest of mine) comments are so hurtful/dangerous to you, please go ahead and downvote me and/or ignore me.
At the same time, I'd prefer it if you didn't doxx/SWAT me or firebomb my house.
I have no control over what you (or anyone else, for that matter) think, do or say, nor am I interested in such control, so I hope you're rational enough not to do the latter, although the former is, IMHO, a normal and reasonable response to irritation/disagreement.
Good luck. I hope everything works out the way you want.
Are my examples[0][1][2] not documented uses for Bitcoin? Note that I was responding to someone who claimed Bitcoin was useless. It is not.
Yes, there are other uses for Bitcoin (Hodling, mostly), but from a consumer standpoint, illegal stuff is what most of us would likely use Bitcoin for.
Troll? Not sure what you've got your panties in a bunch about here. Everything I mentioned is documented as true. And I don't really care how you (or anyone else) feels or reacts to what I have to say.
As such, that it bothers you says more about you than it does about me, IMNSHO.
Bigot? How do you get there?
Bigot(n)
a person who is obstinately or intolerantly devoted to his
or her own opinions and prejudices especially : one who
regards or treats the members of a group (such as a racial
or ethnic group) with hatred and intolerance
(Source: https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/bigot )
So no. Not a troll or a bigot. You (at least it appears that way) seem to think that I disagree with you and, as such, made a personal attack on me. What gives? I didn't attack you or anyone else. I merely stated some facts that debunked GP's assertion that Bitcoin was "useless."
Again, your (apparently) angry reaction to factual statements says more about you than about me.
I hope you have a good day and have a chance to relax and reduce your stress levels, which seem pretty high ATM.
[0] https://www.nbcnewyork.com/news/local/feds-arrest-36-people-...
[1] https://decrypt.co/42614/police-seize-millions-crypto-cash-d...
[2] https://futurism.com/the-byte/bust-child-porn-site-bitcoin-p...
> Are my examples[0][1][2] not documented uses for Bitcoin?
The exact same thing can be said about literally every currency in use today.
> illegal stuff is what most of us would likely use Bitcoin for.
> would likely
You are full of shit. Since you love citing sources, please provide the source that proves this claim ^.
> that it bothers you says more about you than it does about me
You are spreading misinformation in the worst way - mindlessly parroting trolls and deceitful politicians.
> Bigot? How do you get there?
Did you not state that the only legit use of bitcoin is criminal activity? Does that not insinuate that bitcoiners are a bunch of no-good criminals and/or gamblers? That's pretty in line with bigotry. "They're all a bunch of criminals" is the same behavior you see from a lot of other groups of bigots.
> angry reaction to factual statements
Not angry.
Let me state some facts: The absolute most disgusting criminals in the world 1) Breathe oxygen 2) Drink water 3) Use cell phones 4) Use websites
Does this imply that oxygen, water, cell phones, and websites are only useful for criminals?
I neither said nor implied anything of the sort. Nor was anything along those lines intended. There's no subtext or nefarious/disparaging implication either.
That you interpreted my statements that way says much more about you than it does about me.
How does that old saw[0] from the bible go? Ah yes:
The wicked flee when no man pursueth.
The lady doth protest too much, methinks.
Have a good day and I hope you have an outlet for that stress and anger. It's not very becoming.
[0] https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Proverbs%2028&v...
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_lady_doth_protest_too_much...
The system is rigged by old generations heavily invested in tradfi, but give it a few generations and things will radically change ... which might be arguably irrelevant on your own time horizon, fair enough
Yes, absolutely.
> Are NFTs a real danger to tangible items? Are DAOs a real danger to actual corporations?
Agree on these - hard no.
If you mean "digital currencies", then I would be inclined to agree (though it will probably take a lot longer than people think). But existing cryptocurrencies or even future ones built on blockchain and POS/POW? Extremely unlikely.
And, Ethereum will transition to PoS by this year, ideally in August. All of the popular nine Ethereum execution/consensus clients should be ready for the merge, and mainnet has already been test-merged five times successfully.
The first existing PoW testnet will be merged on the first week of June. After that, there's two testnets remaining that will be upgraded (Ropsten -> Goerli -> Sepolia), and then it's time for mainnet.
I feel like every year is the year when Ethereum will finally transition to PoS, but it never happens.
No, just kidding. To be fair, I wasn't aware that there is SO MUCH going on in the crypto space that I have never heard of. But these (as far as I can see) are different blockchains, not actual sites that a user can use do do useful stuff or access useful information.
That's why I was asking for services - to my understanding, just creating a new coin does not make it "web3".
So no, actually, they don't have very much going on at all.
It's trivial to solve one single aspect of the much larger problem by deciding to punt on solving other extremely crucial aspects, like scalability, or decentralization.
Avalanche is also layer 0.
I'm not pro web3, but it didn't take much effort for me to find an example.
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bitcoin_scalability_problem
What does make web3 a real danger is the amount of money behind it. VCs and wealthy tech influencers and billionaires are pushing it because it's an easy way to scam retail investors out of their money in ways that would get the SEC breathing down your neck if crypto and web3 weren't largely lawless territories at the moment.
In a lot of ways the aspect of the web that web3 actually builds on is the lawless "wild west" spirit that legislations have been finally trying to clamp down on in the past decades. The only technical innovation happening in it is the equivalent of software patents for existing technology but "on a computer" (or in this case "on the chain").
Even the crypto enthusiast tech nerds cheerleading the technology because they currently (or initially) make money by sitting comfortably near the top of the pyramid scheme will likely be screwed over and lose everything eventually, but until then they're going hand in hand with the grifters who know better than retain any actual stake in the ecosystem by the time it collapses.
Only a few useful projects will survive.
non-financial & fun
Do you see web3isgoinggreat reporting about [0][1] or perhaps [2] or even [3] and maybe this [4]?
As soon as the speculation calms down and the regulators limit these random DeFi projects there will be these projects like the ones I listed that will be still around that won't be 'wasting electricity' and have a valid use case rather than being a random DeFi token project clobbered up as a exit scam which is what you see that is widely reported and filtered out by web3isgoinggreat.
Sorry, but as long as these companies have re-entered into the same cryptocurrency industry, it is really not going to completely 100% guaranteed go away, unless you ban it all; which that is not going to happen.
The reality is, only a few projects will survive.
[1] https://skiff.org/blog/skiff-x-ethereum-naming
[2] https://stripe.com/blog/expanding-global-payouts-with-crypto
[3] https://ir.moneygram.com/news-releases/news-release-details/...
[4] https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/octo-034-27apr22...
> If you take away the electricity wasting ethereum network you're left with an email client - which is honestly great - but decidedly not web3.
Not quite. It is not just an email client, it is an end-to-end encrypted workspace as well and everything is open source. As long as they still have ENS working with it and wallet logins, it is still Web3.
ENS inherently relies on ethereum. Take away ethereum and you take away ENS. Do that and you take away the only blockchain related part of Skiff. Do that and it's no longer Web3.
> As soon as the speculation calms down and the regulators limit these random DeFi projects, there are projects that will be still around that won't be 'wasting electricity' and have a valid use case rather than being a random DeFi project clobbered up as a exit scam which is what you see that is widely reported and filtered by web3isgoinggreat.
I want to believe in what you say, but at the moment I simply can't. Maybe in a few years, if what you describe actually happens, I'll be able to see this matter differently.
I wonder how much electricity has been wasted on cat videos...
There are all sorts of wastes - the process of waste in attempting to find (R&D) a good crypto, should lead to a net gain in the long run. Cat videos, not so much..
In proof of work crypto though, energy expenditure is by design / intentional, and not only that, but designed to consistently increase.
That feels any comparison between POW crypto to anything else not even apples and oranges, more like car accidents and nuclear weapons - one is an accident, the other is designed to nuke you.
Each year, Bitcoin produces ~37 megatonnes of CO2 per year (https://www.downtoearth.org.in/blog/environment/as-cryptocur...), and i won't consider any other cryptocurrency.
Now, let's assume for a moment that every single youtube video is a cat video, since i found nothing about how much people watch these. So 10 megatonnes of CO2 per year (https://www.wired.co.uk/article/youtube-digital-waste-intera...).
Obviously this is very unfair to cats. But even if that were the case, with this calculation being _really_ biased for crypto, it's still very bad.
But if you're worried about people's privilege you're missing the point and thats what makes you wrong, because nobody with any intelligence responds to 'check your privilege' with anything but derision. focus on the argument with your own logical persuasive argument instead of accusing your opponent of some sort of original sin.
shouting "check your privilege" at the end of a crypto argument isn't checkmate, rather it reduces your argument to one of nonsense. Discuss ideas.
I'm asking because every Web3 project I have seen so far has collapsed after getting just enough speculators (and therefore money) to make a nice rug pull/attack, but well before gaining any significant traction of non-paying users that are there to use the platform rather than speculate. It seems to me that it's completely unsustainable to keep a Web3 project running long enough to even gain these users in any way.
It seems to me that Web3 is, so far, only providing us with three things: the first is a way to speculate, the second is a way to waste our electricity, the third is laughing stock via https://web3isgoinggreat.com/ which only sorta sweetens points number one and two.
Are there any notable exceptions to my above observation? Am I wrong in some more fundamental way?