I thinks it’s not “to give up” but rather to keep it in the tech realm and not to expect it’s a “silver bullet!”
Best Regards | Cordiales Saludos | Yakoke, Andrés L. Pacheco Sanfuentes <[email protected]> +1 (817) 754-0431 > On Feb 21, 2022, at 9:07 AM, Richard Brooks <[email protected]> wrote: > > So. Your suggestion is give up? > > I find web3 has some interesting aspects. I do not think > it has found the right applications yet. > > Will it kill capitalism or reform social media, no? I do > think it has potential to do more than other things evolving > right now. > > On 2/21/22 09:36, Andrés Leopoldo Pacheco Sanfuentes wrote: >> Right On. >> It’s a political issue. Technology just obfuscates the whole thing, the >> mirage of progress. Techie Messianism. >> Best Regards | Cordiales Saludos | Yakoke, >> Andrés L. Pacheco Sanfuentes >> <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> >> +1 (817) 754-0431 >> WACHÍČIŠ’AKE | BLIHEIC'YA YO >>> On Feb 21, 2022, at 8:06 AM, Yosem Companys <[email protected] >>> <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: >>> >>> I found this to be an interesting post, especially in the context of >>> Liberationtech's having supported the development of Diaspora, one of the >>> most successful federated social networking sites. >>> >>> Elon Musk is right. Web3 is BS. >>> By Maciej Baron >>> Jan 9 2022 >>> <https://maciekbaron.medium.com/elon-musk-is-right-web3-is-bs-1cdafc3f96f7 >>> <https://maciekbaron.medium.com/elon-musk-is-right-web3-is-bs-1cdafc3f96f7>> >>> >>> To put it mildly, I am not Elon’s biggest fan. He’s an ignorant, >>> narcissistic, reckless, self-indulgent buffoon who treats his employees >>> like crap, and who just happens to be amazing at marketing himself, which >>> helped him become a billionaire, despite running unprofitable companies. >>> >>> Musk however, recently tweeted something that I wholeheartedly agree with: >>> “Web3 sounds like bs”. >>> >>> Web3 is an idea, which even Bloomberg admitted is a bit hazy, which >>> suggests we can achieve a decentralised World Wide Web using blockchains. >>> The proponents of this concept like to talk about how Web 2.0 became >>> centralised and controlled by big corporations, and how blockchains, crypto >>> and NFTs can help “give the power back to the people”. >>> >>> This all sounds wonderful and looks good on paper, but in reality, it’s >>> simply bullshit. >>> >>> WebBs >>> >>> Web3 is bullshit on several different levels, but most importantly, it >>> confuses a political and power-relationship problem with a technological >>> one. According to Web3 believers, blockchain is the technology that can >>> finally allow the Web to go back to its decentralised roots. The truth is, >>> blockchains are not only useless in achieving that, we already have the >>> technology to do that. >>> >>> ActivityPub is a protocol that has been available for years, and which >>> inspired the creation of fairly successful decentralised, federated social >>> networks such as Mastodon. Any community can create their own ActivityPub >>> instance which is controlled by them — even a single user can create their >>> own server instance if they want to, and federate with other instances. >>> It’s a beautiful architecture that allows people to control who has access >>> to their feeds, and what sort of feeds they are exposed to. >>> >>> So why haven’t we seen a mass exodus of people from Twitter and Facebook to >>> Mastodon, or similar platforms? The technology is there, the platform is >>> there — all it takes is to register and switch. >>> >>> The reason for this is that platforms like Twitter have already achieved >>> enormous power and influence, and a large user base that simply stays where >>> most of the people they follow are. There are plenty of stories of people >>> switching over to Mastodon, only to return to Twitter shortly after, >>> because that’s “where all the action is”. Companies like Twitter spend >>> millions on “customer retention”; they help big brands improve their >>> presence online and give users plenty of reasons to stay and stick to >>> Twitter. >>> >>> The monopolistic nature of the biggest social media platforms is also >>> beneficial to other companies, which can streamline their advertising and >>> marketing campaigns — this benefits the wider capitalist system. The >>> monopoly of the big players is a natural result of the system we have in >>> place. >>> >>> The Web3 thinking is based on the naive technocratic assumption that >>> technology and “smart ideas” can solve most of our societal problems. Its >>> naivety also expands to the belief that free-market capitalism is the >>> solution to the encroachment of monopolies, and not the system that is in >>> fact actively creating and enlarging them. >>> >>> There isn’t a technology that will solve this, and this isn’t happening >>> because of a lack of a certain technology. We already have tools to create >>> a decentralised web, and blockchains aren’t even the right technology to >>> begin with. >>> >>> Blockchains, NFTs and crypto-bullshit >>> >>> A blockchain is a form of a digital ledger, which consists of records >>> called blocks. Such a database is managed autonomously using a peer-to-peer >>> network, meaning there is no main, centralised machine controlling the >>> whole infrastructure. Instead everything is controlled collectively by all >>> the nodes connected to the network. >>> >>> The main purpose of a blockchain, and really the only reason it can be made >>> useful, is to record transactions. It is admittedly a fairly clever way of >>> avoiding the double spending problem — when a digital token is spent twice >>> (or multiple times), that is, transferred to multiple destinations at once. >>> This is also why, so far, the only major use of blockchains is for digital >>> currency, and artificially scarce digital assets (Non-Fungible Tokens — >>> NFTs). >>> >>> Some people have suggested that NFTs could be used for recording things >>> like deeds and property titles, but it makes little sense to use >>> blockchains for recording anything physical or anything that requires >>> off-chain validation, authorisation, authentication or confirmation — even >>> if we consider the use of oracles. Blockchains only make sense in a >>> digital-only world, and only for transactional data — and so far nobody >>> came up with a compelling dapp idea (decentralized application) that is not >>> tied to cryptocurrency in any way. >>> >>> This is why when some Web3 evangelists talk about how social media is >>> centralised and how blockchains can help, you know they’re bullshitting you. >>> >>> Social media posts are not transactional data. You may have “likes” that >>> you can give to posts, but the double spending problem is not relevant >>> here, because you have an unrestricted and unlimited supply of “likes”. We >>> already have decades old technologies like PGP which can prove the >>> authenticity of a post. We already have distributed, peer-to-peer >>> technologies allowing for censorship-proof, decentralised storage of data >>> (such as WebTorrent used by PeerTube). >>> >>> Unstoppable Domains looks okay on paper, but it’s a for-profit solution >>> that isn’t really as decentralised as it pretends to be: you still have to >>> go through UD to purchase domains. Moreover, getting around a DNS block is >>> quite trivial, and “unstoppable” domains won’t solve the problem of a hard >>> IP block by your IPS if used as a DNS provider. >>> >>> Projects like the Interplanetary File System (IPFS) are interesting, and >>> were already used to fight against censorship. However, the pricing model >>> is slightly obfuscated, the cost of “pinning” (permanent storage) is a few >>> times higher compared to regular storage solutions. If you’re using a >>> company like Pinata to host (“pin”) your content and guarantee its >>> permanence while you pay a monthly fee, you should start asking yourself >>> how much decentralisation you are really left with if you still rely on >>> your hosting provider and on the caching policy of independent nodes. >>> Moreover, we already have magnet links, Tor Onion services and platforms >>> like FreeNet, which is nearly 22 years old now (the web itself is only 9 >>> years older). >>> >>> The technology is already here! We have had similar technologies for >>> decades now! …and new technology is not what we need to fight the enormous >>> power of the biggest platforms. That’s bullshit. >>> >>> [snip] >>> -- >>> Liberationtech is public & archives are searchable from any major >>> commercial search engine. Violations of list guidelines will get you >>> moderated: https://lists.ghserv.net/mailman/listinfo/lt >>> <https://lists.ghserv.net/mailman/listinfo/lt>. Unsubscribe, change to >>> digest mode, or change password by emailing >>> [email protected] >>> <mailto:[email protected]>. > > > -- > R. R. Brooks > Professor > (He/Him/His) > College of Engineering Computing and Applied Science > https://www.clemson.edu/cecas > Clemson University > > 313-C Riggs Hall > PO Box 340915 > Clemson, SC 29634-0915 > USA > office: 864-656-0920 > fax: 864-656-5910 > voicemail: 864-986-0813 > [email protected] > www.clemson.edu > https://www.clemson.edu > > PGP 1: 955B 3813 41C0 9101 3E6B CF05 02FB 29D6 8E1E 6137 > PGP 2: FC15 BAF0 4296 B47E 932A 9DB3 D41B 81AF C6EA 90F6 > > > -- > Liberationtech is public & archives are searchable from any major commercial > search engine. Violations of list guidelines will get you moderated: > https://lists.ghserv.net/mailman/listinfo/lt. Unsubscribe, change to digest > mode, or change password by emailing [email protected].
-- Liberationtech is public & archives are searchable from any major commercial search engine. Violations of list guidelines will get you moderated: https://lists.ghserv.net/mailman/listinfo/lt. Unsubscribe, change to digest mode, or change password by emailing [email protected].
