One of the most salient features of our Tech Hiring culture is that there is so much bullshit. Everyone knows this. Each of us contributes his share. But we tend to take the situation for granted.
Web5 already? Massive FOMO. I barely understood Web3 and never heard about Web4.
Man I dislike this "Web n++" naming so much...
Even the original "Web 2.0" thing was vague and arbitrary. Since then , further iterations have less and less to do with the world wide web.
IMHO calling something "Web42" seems like a cheap way to imply without proving it that whatever your thing is, is going to be the future and is going to be hugely important like the actual world wide web. Which was a world historical revolution similar to the invention of the wheel, the printing press or the industrial revolution. How likely is that?
Bitcoin is a good example: Bitcoin is clearly not the future. It's the future like lead in gasoline was the future. Solving a short term issue while creating massive long term pollution. Bitcoin is something that must be given up voluntarily or more likely regulated away if we want to have a future, given the energy-climate crisis. Which is not gonna go away while Bitcoin advocates close their eyes or don't even care.
Maybe your thing is the future though. I don't have a clue. Who am I to know what the future will look like?
But my point then is that extraordinary claims like this should come with extraordinary evidence.
And a mere list of complex technologies isn't that.
Sure, your technology is much more complex than the world wide web or the wheel. But that's not a good thing per se. In fact that's probably what makes it less universally useful.
I completely agree. The Ethereum developers coined the web3 term very early and so far I feel it's inappropriate to use it, because Ethereum hasn't delivered on its promise to be "the next web", yet.
However with Jack coining the term web5 (and skipping web4) the name has become completely nonsensical. I'm not sure if this was the intention, but yeah, who would now want to name a new technology web4 or web6? So maybe the best thing web5 has already brought us was to kill these controversial names for good.
Now it might come to you as a surprise (at least it was for me), but Jack's web5 technology is actually based on W3C standards, e.g. DID - and it is not just a proposal, it already has the "Recommended" status. So web5 might actually be the future of the web despite its clickbait name.
For further actions, you may consider blocking this person and/or reporting abuse
We're a place where coders share, stay up-to-date and grow their careers.
Web5 already? Massive FOMO. I barely understood Web3 and never heard about Web4.
Man I dislike this "Web n++" naming so much...
Even the original "Web 2.0" thing was vague and arbitrary. Since then , further iterations have less and less to do with the world wide web.
IMHO calling something "Web42" seems like a cheap way to imply without proving it that whatever your thing is, is going to be the future and is going to be hugely important like the actual world wide web. Which was a world historical revolution similar to the invention of the wheel, the printing press or the industrial revolution. How likely is that?
Bitcoin is a good example: Bitcoin is clearly not the future. It's the future like lead in gasoline was the future. Solving a short term issue while creating massive long term pollution. Bitcoin is something that must be given up voluntarily or more likely regulated away if we want to have a future, given the energy-climate crisis. Which is not gonna go away while Bitcoin advocates close their eyes or don't even care.
Maybe your thing is the future though. I don't have a clue. Who am I to know what the future will look like?
But my point then is that extraordinary claims like this should come with extraordinary evidence.
And a mere list of complex technologies isn't that.
Sure, your technology is much more complex than the world wide web or the wheel. But that's not a good thing per se. In fact that's probably what makes it less universally useful.
I completely agree. The Ethereum developers coined the web3 term very early and so far I feel it's inappropriate to use it, because Ethereum hasn't delivered on its promise to be "the next web", yet.
However with Jack coining the term web5 (and skipping web4) the name has become completely nonsensical. I'm not sure if this was the intention, but yeah, who would now want to name a new technology web4 or web6? So maybe the best thing web5 has already brought us was to kill these controversial names for good.
Now it might come to you as a surprise (at least it was for me), but Jack's web5 technology is actually based on W3C standards, e.g. DID - and it is not just a proposal, it already has the "Recommended" status. So web5 might actually be the future of the web despite its clickbait name.