55

Have no idea what it is about, other than being decentralised. Some basic search results suggests that its a sham, scam and riddled with crypto ideas. Or is it apart of something noteworthy? Geuinly curious what the general consensus is of the Web3.

top 38 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] squirrel@discuss.tchncs.de 65 points 7 months ago
[-] dustyData@lemmy.world 56 points 7 months ago

It's a marketing term. It means nothing. It was invented to sell scams. Just like Web 2.0, nothing changes in the underlying tech stack or the technical capabilities of the infrastructure. Unlike web 2.0 which was coined post-hoc to describe a qualitative change in the way the web was being used, web 3.0 was invented as a copycat term. A gimmick to create the illusion of technological progress.

[-] Bishma@discuss.tchncs.de 43 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago)

There are very few use cases where an append-only database (like the blockchains that web3 are supposed to be based on) is a good idea. So the idea web3 is most focused on is artificial digital scarcity. That's about as anti-web as I think you can get.

[-] RobotToaster@mander.xyz 36 points 7 months ago

Web 3.0 > Web3.

(ActivityPub is part of Web 3.0)

[-] algorithmae@lemmy.sdf.org 7 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago)

"The term "Web3" was coined in 2014 by Ethereum co-founder Gavin Wood, and the idea gained interest in 2021 from cryptocurrency enthusiasts, large technology companies, and venture capital firms."

That tells me everything that I need to know.

[-] andrewrgross@slrpnk.net 5 points 7 months ago

Thanks for this clarification!

[-] puppy@lemmy.world 29 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago)

Web is by definition decentralised. I can run a website on my home PC and it's part of the internet. Web3 is about running Blockchain. They are two independent concepts imho. When it comes to Web3, my opinion of it is "meh". It's a buzzword more than anything.

[-] RobotToaster@mander.xyz 4 points 7 months ago

To be fair namecoin and emerDNS were/are trying to solve the centralised bit of the web, the DNS root.

[-] aBundleOfFerrets@sh.itjust.works 4 points 7 months ago

OpenNIC is a much more useful stab at that, I think

[-] xigoi@lemmy.sdf.org 2 points 7 months ago
[-] aBundleOfFerrets@sh.itjust.works 1 points 7 months ago

Eeeh I don’t think peering with a blockchain-y shitpile is really anything to get worked up over all things considered

[-] Alice@hilariouschaos.com 1 points 7 months ago
[-] theywilleatthestars@lemmy.world 23 points 7 months ago

It was usually treated as synonymous with NFTs/cryptocurrency/the metaverse and only soulless investor types liked those things so they all went bust

[-] Alice@hilariouschaos.com 1 points 7 months ago
[-] vk6flab@lemmy.radio 17 points 7 months ago

The term has been embraced and extended by the bandwagon of popular "journalism" in exactly the same way as "artificial intelligence", "block chain" and plenty of others before then, "interactive multimedia", "internet ready", "plug and play", "desktop publishing" and "turbo" to name a "few".

[-] db2@lemmy.world 19 points 7 months ago

You got something against cybersurfing the webbernet tubes?

[-] vk6flab@lemmy.radio 7 points 7 months ago

You mean the information superhighway?

[-] homesweethomeMrL@lemmy.world 4 points 7 months ago

We’re gonna “log on” and “jack in!”

[-] puppy@lemmy.world 2 points 7 months ago

Shout out to Utopia!

[-] Alice@hilariouschaos.com 1 points 7 months ago
[-] art@lemmy.world 14 points 7 months ago

There was this idea that instead of having the web powered by large data companies like Google and Meta you could keep all your information in the blockchain. It was an attempt to "take back control".

However, most of the proponents kinda forgot that the web is already decentralized and only portions are controlled by Meta and Google.

Then, of course, we had the grifters come in.

The whole thing was built on a misunderstanding of how the web actually works.

[-] treadful@lemmy.zip 1 points 7 months ago

I think most proponents/engineers got distracted by number go up and forgot about the decentralization of the Web part. The little bits that are good about it just can't seem to figure out the UX problem.

[-] snooggums@midwest.social 1 points 7 months ago

I think the creators of web3 did understand how the web works, but wanted to change it and sold the change by gaslighting people about how web3 actually works.

[-] Alice@hilariouschaos.com 1 points 7 months ago
[-] Alice@hilariouschaos.com 1 points 7 months ago
[-] kate@lemmy.uhhoh.com 13 points 7 months ago

The original idea was simply for people to control their own data on decentralised networks, I don’t think anyone had a problem with that definition. The term seems to be mostly crypto related now though.

[-] snooggums@midwest.social 1 points 7 months ago

The original idea was simply for people to control their own data on decentralised networks, I don’t think anyone had a problem with that definition.

That is how the web has worked since its inception. The fact that people choose to primarily go through a limited number of effective monopolies doesn't mean the underlying structure is centralized.

[-] ignirtoq@fedia.io 4 points 7 months ago

But people aren't using the web the same way they were at inception. These big companies have built closed source, centralized systems on top of the decentralized infrastructure to serve new use-cases that weren't envisioned in the original standards. People like these new use-cases, so we need new standards, etc., to facilitate a re-decentralization of data and features in these new use-cases if we want the most used parts of the web to maintain their openness.

I don't think it's fair to lay the blame on the common user for the centralization of their data, when only the centralized systems have been providing the capabilities they want until very recently (where the open alternatives have arisen partly because of new standards like ActivityPub).

[-] JackGreenEarth@lemm.ee 4 points 7 months ago

The DNS system is inherently centralised, so is IP address assignment. In both cases you have to got through a centralised agency or their intermediaries.

[-] cley_faye@lemmy.world 8 points 7 months ago

Some people decided that they needed a buzzword for something that have absolutely nothing to do with the web, and they decided to use Web3.

Anything "web3" you can think of is a regular webservice, that have no technological difference with "web2" (whatever this was), and may or may not behind the scene communicate with some form of blockchain (which may or may not be a real one too).

That's web3. And note that I didn't even bother to go check what happens on the blockchain side, that is already so removed from the web it's insulting people calls this web3.

[-] Allero@lemmy.today 8 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago)

Web3 is a marketing term for Web2 sites that usually involve crypto/decentralized crypto-driven "metaverses".

Web4 was employed by Meta/Facebook as a marketing to their "metaverse".

Web 3.0 is a real term meaning an evolution of Internet oriented at establishing a universal framework for machines to easily process Web data, while keeping it fully human-readable.

[-] vrighter@discuss.tchncs.de 5 points 7 months ago

it's all the same web 2.0 bullshit, but for anything with crypto in its name

[-] pixeltree@lemmy.blahaj.zone 4 points 7 months ago

Basically, it's a buzzword and anything it's attached to is pretty much a scam

This question is unanswerable without a concise definition of what is meant by Web3 ?

[-] Snapz@lemmy.world 2 points 7 months ago

Sure, but we're releasing 32K TVs! That's substantially more K!!!

[-] captainlezbian@lemmy.world 2 points 7 months ago

Everything about it sounds awful, but especially thr people. Like, LinkedIn for unemployed douchebags

Fediverse follows the goals better

[-] nick@midwest.social 1 points 7 months ago
[-] Alice@hilariouschaos.com 1 points 7 months ago
this post was submitted on 10 May 2024
55 points (92.3% liked)

No Stupid Questions

36188 readers
882 users here now

No such thing. Ask away!

!nostupidquestions is a community dedicated to being helpful and answering each others' questions on various topics.

The rules for posting and commenting, besides the rules defined here for lemmy.world, are as follows:

Rules (interactive)


Rule 1- All posts must be legitimate questions. All post titles must include a question.

All posts must be legitimate questions, and all post titles must include a question. Questions that are joke or trolling questions, memes, song lyrics as title, etc. are not allowed here. See Rule 6 for all exceptions.



Rule 2- Your question subject cannot be illegal or NSFW material.

Your question subject cannot be illegal or NSFW material. You will be warned first, banned second.



Rule 3- Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here.

Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here. Breaking this rule will not get you or your post removed, but it will put you at risk, and possibly in danger.



Rule 4- No self promotion or upvote-farming of any kind.

That's it.



Rule 5- No baiting or sealioning or promoting an agenda.

Questions which, instead of being of an innocuous nature, are specifically intended (based on reports and in the opinion of our crack moderation team) to bait users into ideological wars on charged political topics will be removed and the authors warned - or banned - depending on severity.



Rule 6- Regarding META posts and joke questions.

Provided it is about the community itself, you may post non-question posts using the [META] tag on your post title.

On fridays, you are allowed to post meme and troll questions, on the condition that it's in text format only, and conforms with our other rules. These posts MUST include the [NSQ Friday] tag in their title.

If you post a serious question on friday and are looking only for legitimate answers, then please include the [Serious] tag on your post. Irrelevant replies will then be removed by moderators.



Rule 7- You can't intentionally annoy, mock, or harass other members.

If you intentionally annoy, mock, harass, or discriminate against any individual member, you will be removed.

Likewise, if you are a member, sympathiser or a resemblant of a movement that is known to largely hate, mock, discriminate against, and/or want to take lives of a group of people, and you were provably vocal about your hate, then you will be banned on sight.



Rule 8- All comments should try to stay relevant to their parent content.



Rule 9- Reposts from other platforms are not allowed.

Let everyone have their own content.



Rule 10- Majority of bots aren't allowed to participate here.



Credits

Our breathtaking icon was bestowed upon us by @Cevilia!

The greatest banner of all time: by @TheOneWithTheHair!

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS