Why does everything need a f***ing blockchain? They're slow, resource hungry, and cumbersome.
Sir. Tim Berners-Lee (yes, the guy behind the internet) has been on this for years - check out Solid (first released in 2015) - seems like a way better way forward than any of this web3, and now web5 nonsense
I'm not agree with all you say. Are blockchains slow? Not every of them. Are blockchains resource hungry? Not every of them. Are blockchains cumbersome? As you guessed, not every one.
There is indeed a lot of cases where web 2 is betters than web 3, but there is a lot of cases where it's not. Taking the storage example. Storing a file online can be expensive. With the Blockchain technology, it's so much less expensive, you can't imagine. You also have a better free tier. Note: everything on the Blockchain is immutable, including files, meaning we can't delete files from the Blockchain, it's a cons.
Another example i could give you is the interoperability. It's easier to use something already existing with the Blockchain than the current web.
Other example, security. It's not that easy to hack a smart contract, but easier to hack a classic website.
I could give you more examples of good use cases of this technology, but that's not my goal. The point is, i totally understand we can't do everything with Blockchain, but this technology is not useless too.
You can read more about what i think of the technology here
Referring me to your article as an answer is not very argumentative, knowing that, as you say yourself, your article is only a simple repost of pre-existing articles or videos. I would have liked to know your subjective point of view about blockchain.
Edit: I would add that after reading some articles you mentionned, it seems clear to me that these are childish arguments. Some of your articles mention the fact that a blockchain is not secure, because anyone can be hacked. It is exactly the same with the current web, knowing that it is even easier to hack them.
Personally, I think that in most cases it's still a solution in search of a problem. I've come across some use cases that do sound interesting and have merit (voting systems being a good one), but all the promising ideas are mostly buried under an avalanche of NFTs and "me too" projects that have blockchains tacked on for no discernible reason other than to ride the hype.
Storing a file online can be expensive. With the Blockchain technology, it's so much less expensive, you can't imagine.
That's not true mate... If you are talking about storing the file data inside the blockchain it's not true, it's way cheaper to store on a regular old server. If you mean using something like IPFS or similar, maybe it's cheaper. Or if you're talking about nfts where you just point to a file on another server then yes it is, but the file is not in the blockchain.
Google drive offers 200GB for 3€ month. Try and store 100GB on a blockchain and then tell me if it's cheaper or not.
The point is, i totally understand we can't do everything with Blockchain, but this technology is not useless too.
I agree, the tech itself is usefull, what's not usefull is thinking it is the solution for every problem. For me the only way to make blockchains worth it is to remove speculation from the equation. Then make it cheap and not as resource intensive, then we might have something usefull and that will not polute the whole planet.
If you are talking about storing the file data inside the blockchain it's not true, it's way cheaper to store on a regular old server
I think I expressed myself wrong about storage. When I was talking about cheaper storage, I was talking about raw file storage, like pdf files, images.... using IPFS or Arewave for example. This is part of the blockchain ecosystem, but it's not exactly blockchain, you're right.
For me the only way to make blockchains worth it is to remove speculation from the equation
Unfortunately, everything is subject to speculation these days. We can sell tickets for an artist at an exorbitant price.
Then make it cheap and not as resource intensive, then we might have something usefull and that will not polute the whole planet.
Concerning ecology, I think it's a bad argument. Many people say that blockchains pollute, but it's not really the case. If we change scale, airplanes pollute more, so do factories, so do nuclear power plants. Even a simple car can probably pollute more than a modern blockchain. Moreover, the energy of the blockchain is recycled from renewable energies, or in other uses.
This is part of the blockchain ecosystem, but it's not exactly blockchain, you're right.
Correct, most blockchains don't allow much data to be stored inside it, at least in the transactions themselves. Last time I experimenting with this, the bitcoin blockchain only allowed 1kb of data to be stored per transaction, so if you wanted to store a 1mb file in the blockchain you had to do many transactions. Then recompile all of them and reconstruct the image. Of course there are other options and blockchains have evolved quite a bit since I did that.
Unfortunately, everything is subject to speculation these days. We can sell tickets for an artist at an exorbitant price.
It's possible, if you don't let the users trade the coin, or even better remove the coins and currencies from the equation xD Decentralized systems should not be backed by a currency, currencies should be backed by decentralized systems.
Concerning ecology, I think it's a bad argument.
Id argue that it is, you see we're not in a point where we need to pollute more, we need to pollute less. Creating systems that require excesive amounts of power to run is not good, at least if we keep on the same track and not switch to cheaper ways to validate transactions. There are solutions out there that reduce the computing power by quite a lot, but they're still not implemented for reasons.
I agree that planes, boats, factories, etc... pollute more. But blockchain pollution does not only comes from the energy spent mining, but from the electronics that are needed to mine e.g. graphic cards, cpus, etc...
Moreover, the energy of the blockchain is recycled from renewable energies, or in other uses.
I don't think I understand what you mean here. Do you mean that blockchain uses renewable energy?
I'm with you, I've work with decentralized systems, blockchain and web3 at work for over 5 years now, and I can tell you than in most cases it makes no sense to use. It just adds a complex and expensive layer. I see the value of the tech, though it does not need to be used for everything...
I doubt it will stick for more than 10-15 years, at least at the level that it's being "used" nowadays. I don't think it's the solution for most stuff... Decentralization yes, blockchain I doubt it...
Why does everything need a f***ing blockchain? They're slow, resource hungry, and cumbersome.
Sir. Tim Berners-Lee (yes, the guy behind the internet) has been on this for years - check out Solid (first released in 2015) - seems like a way better way forward than any of this web3, and now web5 nonsense
I'm not agree with all you say. Are blockchains slow? Not every of them. Are blockchains resource hungry? Not every of them. Are blockchains cumbersome? As you guessed, not every one.
There is indeed a lot of cases where web 2 is betters than web 3, but there is a lot of cases where it's not. Taking the storage example. Storing a file online can be expensive. With the Blockchain technology, it's so much less expensive, you can't imagine. You also have a better free tier. Note: everything on the Blockchain is immutable, including files, meaning we can't delete files from the Blockchain, it's a cons.
Another example i could give you is the interoperability. It's easier to use something already existing with the Blockchain than the current web.
Other example, security. It's not that easy to hack a smart contract, but easier to hack a classic website.
I could give you more examples of good use cases of this technology, but that's not my goal. The point is, i totally understand we can't do everything with Blockchain, but this technology is not useless too.
You can read more about what i think of the technology here
Web 3.0: not ready yet?!
Olyno ・ Mar 1 ・ 5 min read
The Problems with Web3 and NFTs
Jon Randy ・ Jan 30 ・ 2 min read
Referring me to your article as an answer is not very argumentative, knowing that, as you say yourself, your article is only a simple repost of pre-existing articles or videos. I would have liked to know your subjective point of view about blockchain.
Edit: I would add that after reading some articles you mentionned, it seems clear to me that these are childish arguments. Some of your articles mention the fact that a blockchain is not secure, because anyone can be hacked. It is exactly the same with the current web, knowing that it is even easier to hack them.
Personally, I think that in most cases it's still a solution in search of a problem. I've come across some use cases that do sound interesting and have merit (voting systems being a good one), but all the promising ideas are mostly buried under an avalanche of NFTs and "me too" projects that have blockchains tacked on for no discernible reason other than to ride the hype.
So we are on the same page ahah, thanks for taking the time to give me your perspective on this technology!
That's not true mate... If you are talking about storing the file data inside the blockchain it's not true, it's way cheaper to store on a regular old server. If you mean using something like IPFS or similar, maybe it's cheaper. Or if you're talking about nfts where you just point to a file on another server then yes it is, but the file is not in the blockchain.
Google drive offers 200GB for 3€ month. Try and store 100GB on a blockchain and then tell me if it's cheaper or not.
I agree, the tech itself is usefull, what's not usefull is thinking it is the solution for every problem. For me the only way to make blockchains worth it is to remove speculation from the equation. Then make it cheap and not as resource intensive, then we might have something usefull and that will not polute the whole planet.
I think I expressed myself wrong about storage. When I was talking about cheaper storage, I was talking about raw file storage, like pdf files, images.... using IPFS or Arewave for example. This is part of the blockchain ecosystem, but it's not exactly blockchain, you're right.
Unfortunately, everything is subject to speculation these days. We can sell tickets for an artist at an exorbitant price.
Concerning ecology, I think it's a bad argument. Many people say that blockchains pollute, but it's not really the case. If we change scale, airplanes pollute more, so do factories, so do nuclear power plants. Even a simple car can probably pollute more than a modern blockchain. Moreover, the energy of the blockchain is recycled from renewable energies, or in other uses.
Correct, most blockchains don't allow much data to be stored inside it, at least in the transactions themselves. Last time I experimenting with this, the bitcoin blockchain only allowed 1kb of data to be stored per transaction, so if you wanted to store a 1mb file in the blockchain you had to do many transactions. Then recompile all of them and reconstruct the image. Of course there are other options and blockchains have evolved quite a bit since I did that.
It's possible, if you don't let the users trade the coin, or even better remove the coins and currencies from the equation xD Decentralized systems should not be backed by a currency, currencies should be backed by decentralized systems.
Id argue that it is, you see we're not in a point where we need to pollute more, we need to pollute less. Creating systems that require excesive amounts of power to run is not good, at least if we keep on the same track and not switch to cheaper ways to validate transactions. There are solutions out there that reduce the computing power by quite a lot, but they're still not implemented for reasons.
I agree that planes, boats, factories, etc... pollute more. But blockchain pollution does not only comes from the energy spent mining, but from the electronics that are needed to mine e.g. graphic cards, cpus, etc...
I don't think I understand what you mean here. Do you mean that blockchain uses renewable energy?
Not every of them, but yes.
I'm with you, I've work with decentralized systems, blockchain and web3 at work for over 5 years now, and I can tell you than in most cases it makes no sense to use. It just adds a complex and expensive layer. I see the value of the tech, though it does not need to be used for everything...
I doubt it will stick for more than 10-15 years, at least at the level that it's being "used" nowadays. I don't think it's the solution for most stuff... Decentralization yes, blockchain I doubt it...
Tim Berners-Lee: Screw Web3 — my decentralized web has no blockchain
At TNW 2022, World Wide Web inventor Tim Berners-Lee explained why his plan for a decentralized internet aligns with Web 3.0 but not Web3.