The Metaverse

[vimothy]

what is this new way of thinking about databases then?

 

[Clinamenic]

But yeah unfortunately where there is quick, big, illicit money to be made, the hype will largely be dominated by grifters and impatient, unscrupulous investors. The latter is best summarized by the "wen lambo?" sentiment.

 

[vimothy]

Web 3.0 is just the internet stack, with distributed database protocols like blockchain added to it.

but if blockchains are a bad idea, and they seems like one, what does that imply for web3.0?

 

[Clinamenic]

what is this new way of thinking about databases then?

That databases can be maintained in a distributed fashion without central administration, that the security can be programmed into the protocol itself. Distributed computing isn't new, but as I understand it, what Bitcoin brought to the table was the idea that a bunch of computers, run by different actors, can harmoniously maintain a universal database with very good security.

 

[Clinamenic]

but if blockchains are a bad idea, and they seems like one, what does that imply for web3.0?

It may be a bad idea to use blockchains for everything, in fact I'd say thats obviously the case. Not everything needs to be stored and accessed in this way. That said, not every blockchain needs to be permissionless. And distributed database technology can be broader than blockchains. There are also examples of "directed acyclic graphs" which aren't classifiable as blockchains, but blockchains are classifiable as DAGs I believe.

 

[vimothy]

come off it security on the blockchain is complete ass, that's one of its defining characteristics!

 

[Clinamenic]

Actually to my knowledge its quite good. I'm certainly no expert on cryptography, but its my understanding that falsification of a database like Bitcoin is prohibitively expensive, requiring a bad actor to buy most of the compute power in the network. This security measure, as I understand, was explicitly intended as the central security measure.

 

[Clinamenic]

That said, this security measure really depends on the network underpinning the database in question to be large enough to prohibit such corruption. If a new blockchain adopted the same code as bitcoin, but with far fewer computers, it would follow that the security would be weaker.

 

[vimothy]

ok if you define security in those terms then sure, but in general is crypto free from scams? I think quite the opposite

 

[Clinamenic]

That said, this security measure really depends on the network underpinning the database in question to be large enough to prohibit such corruption. If a new blockchain adopted the same code as bitcoin, but with far fewer computers, it would follow that the security would be weaker.

Which is to say, not every blockchain has this kind of security. I also think proof-of-stake makes some security trade-offs, but I just don't understand the nature of this trade-off.

 

[Clinamenic]

ok if you define security in those terms then sure, but in general is crypto free from scams? I think quite the opposite

You're definitely right. Security in the sense of protecting my funds from scammers is dependent on factors that the protocols themselves cannot account for, such as whether I keep my private keys safe, whether or not send 1 BTC to someone who promises to send 2 BTC in return, etc.

 

[vimothy]

consider the effects, in effect how secure are any of these blockchains?

 

[vimothy]

You're definitely right. Security in the sense of protecting my funds from scammers is dependent on factors that the protocols themselves cannot account for, such as whether I keep my private keys safe, whether or not send 1 BTC to someone who promises to send 2 BTC in return, etc.

right exactly it's open season atm, the space is riddled with scams

 

[Clinamenic]

consider the effects, in effect how secure are any of these blockchains?

I'd say the blockchains themselves are secure. The problem is the unscrupulous behavior of investors, and the lack of regulatory protection they have against scammers. It boils down to decisions made by blockchain users, not the protocols themselves.

 

[vimothy]

that is in fact the major attraction

 

[vimothy]

I'd say the blockchains themselves are secure. The problem is the unscrupulous behavior of investors, and the lack of regulatory protection they have against scammers. It boils down to decisions made by blockchain users, not the protocols themselves.

so, in effect, how secure are these blockchains?

 

[Clinamenic]

that is in fact the major attraction

Yeah and really this gets at the biggest problems of web3, in my opinion. That this kind of unscrupulous engagement with these protocols is encouraged by the culture of web3, with influencers and advertisers fanning the flames of FOMO.

 

[Clinamenic]

so, in effect, how secure are these blockchains?

I'd still say they are secure, people just need to learn how to use them. Just because I could drive a car onto a sidewalk and mow down a bunch of pedestrians doesn't make cars a prohibitively dangerous technology. Its just a matter of regulation, and analyzing trade-offs.

I think maybe the biggest reason why such fraudulent activity is so rampant right now is because of a lack of regulation, another reason for the frontier metaphor, i.e. unsettled by major institutional actors who lay down the law.

 

[Clinamenic]

And that is gradually happening, as one would predict with any lucrative frontier. TikTok influencers are being regulated, shilling celebrities are being sued, and I think even a crypto-specific regulatory agency is being formed to take over some of the unnatural responsibilities of the SEC.

 

[Clinamenic]

But the fact that a bunch of computers can maintain a database that is prohibitively expensive to tamper with, without a central administrator, is profound.