Ask HN: What is your Web3? Web4? Do we still have a web?

12 点作者 csbartus超过 3 年前

A recent thread[0] sheds light on how different hackers and crypto-enthusiasts see the term web3, or the future of the web. With VR/AR entering the picture[1] this fragmentation grows.This made me wonder how I see the future of the web, and would fellow HNers agree with?For me the web3 term was already coined years ago with the Semantic Web. Then completely distorted / replaced by reality: social networks. So what's this web3/crypto wave? Maybe we are already thinking about web4? Outside the web? Anyway, what is web1, web2, webX?* web1 - Academic, hacker driven, early adopters* web2 - Fully open to public, via blogs* web3 - Semi-open, planet scale, mandatory social networks and apps built on personal data / advertising.* web4 - More divide: blockchains, various reality layers.It's clear we can't go forward with the `web` term. It's rather platforms than the web. Web1-2 went with the browser platform, web3 introduced the app/portable device platform, the next paradigms will introduce new platforms and devices.I guess we should say goodbye to the web idea, a generally available, `free` platform for all, with non-mandatory participation.We are already in the mandatory era, where we all carry a device and connect to a network, being exploited 24/7. Next, we will carry better devices (VR, AR) better exploiting us. If we say no to all devices, the the environment (IoT) will exploit us in a mandatory way.I guess we can affirm the web, the ideal it represents, it's dead.[0] - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29727420[1] - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ncoiotldS-8&t=1s

7 条评论

olivierduval超过 3 年前

I think that Web 1 & Web 2 are more "technical" concepts:- Web 1 is about publishing content like a newspaper on website (or hosted blog)- Web 2 is about interactive content (comments, retweets, likes)For me, Web 3 is hard to define, because there's a lot of marketing... Let's say maybe the bitcoin & blockchain tech on the technical side (and the ransomware industry).Is AR/VR another king of Web X ? Not sure... it's more another kind of browser (like the smartphone is another kind of computer) but until now, there's no different kind of servicesOn the other side: AI allows a different kind of services... but is not related to Web only.I think that Web 4 will come when we will understand that "Web 3" is about "complete individual liberty"... and that we will understand that it's wrong: if the "good guys" have this kind of liberty, the bad guy have it too ! So it's a kind of a "new Far West" without any lawsI think that Web 4 should be technically the comeback to federation (like email or mastodon) with user-owned datas (on THEIR computer/phone, not on some Facebook server) protected by some king of differential privacy, allowing users to "pay" either in datas, cash or bitcoin. As the servers are federated, it's still possible to "block" some bad contents or unlawfull behaviour at scale without restricting too much individual liberty.Just a thought and YMMV

speedgoose超过 3 年前

I hope the proof-of-work people will have the same success than the Semantic Web people about claiming the Web3 term.I find your definition of web3 with social networks and advertising pretty good.It's difficult to predict the future, but I hope it's something useful and respectful.

gls2ro超过 3 年前

Let me share maybe a "new" idea here: there is no such thing as web1, web2, web3 ....This is just a need to put a name on something that is a combination of technology and policy and for me does not make any sense.The web is still free: anyone (of course with enough knowledge) can host a blog and share their views. Anyone is free to use or not to use a social media.And in the same time because we operate at scale there are forces that are outside the web that put pressure on the web.There is not one tech thing that can be created yet that will circumvent in any way the forces (political, law, peer pressure ....) that are currently shaping the web. Here is one example: blockchain cannot exist outside the law where it will collide with the law. Because the law is about the people mostly and not about the technology.The same with anonimity: it does not matter if blockchain offers this because when it collides with easyness to access things people will choose easy. I am not saying anonimity is bad or that blockchain is useless.But I am saying any webN concepts will win when things will change in our mindset, our culture and our society. As long as we approach things as they are, webN will not solve our society issues.The same as the Internet did not solved education. I remember when I first encountered Internet in the 90s I learned a lot. Then late 90s everyone was talking about how free access to internet will make everyone smarter and more educated. This did not happened. It created more opportunities but did not changes the structure of our society. People (me included) were spending time with stupid things before the internet and they are still doing it now with the internet. We will continue to spend stupid time with web3 or crypto. As the problem is not technology but human nature. So far technology cannot change human nature. It can speed up our advantages or can make use of our flaws but the will to change is still human.I am not even sure what I am debating there. But this focus on technology is an illusion that we hope to be true as it seems to allow each one of us more control over what happens with humanity, when actually technology is not yet there to help us without us helping ourselves.

ssss11超过 3 年前

While you’re entitled to your opinion, and I have no idea how many others share your views, I disagree.The common Web 1, 2, 3 definitions seem well defined and known enough for consensus.Web3 though, I think is about empowering users, and if blockchain is a technology option that enables that then great. I’ve been following self sovereign identity since about 2014 and thought that would the tech but it doesn’t matter at the end of the day which tech gives people agency, control of their data, and the ability to have privacy.The point about a mandatory web is moot if Web3 takes off with privacy by design.

评论 #29736097 未加载

SKILNER超过 3 年前

Web3 - Solution to a problem that only Silicon Valley elites care about. I.e., it's an IT project, not a user project.Not only that, if you assume the problem, it's not clear there's a Web3 technology that is even a viable solution.

muzani超过 3 年前

Web 1: static sitesWeb 2: dynamic sites, e.g. commentingWeb 3: sites are hosted from a pen drive

matt_s超过 3 年前

- Web 1.0 was really the basics of content and linking, ugly flashing banners, etc.- Web 2.0 was really about web applications, I don't think social media or websites really counts in this as I see it as a revolution in the business sphere. Desktop apps were no longer necessary to do things - you can build web apps, like Salesforce as an example.- Web 3.0 seems like a buzzword so far and people want to delineate that there is a new paradigm but it's really fuzzy on what that actually might be. I think people are a little too focused on blockchain, that might be an implementation detail of Web 3.0 when its less fuzzy.I think there is some emerging things and web 3.0 could be a revolution of sorts in finance and art. By "art" I mean broadly speaking but things that are digital - music, videos, games, digital worlds (aka metaverse). I think more practically so some examples might help the discussion:- If web 3.0 ends up being putting on a VR headset and as your avatar, "walking" into a digital shopping mall to purchase a stick of deodorant using some crypto then I say its a giant failure. I think VR will be pretty limited, just look at 3D TV's that were supposed to take off - the majority of people don't like wearing goggles/3D glasses for entertainment.- If web 3.0 allows artists to fund their work (via blockchain, contracts, NFT) to have limited releases that can be bought/sold/traded without huge fees then it could eliminate a lot of "middlemen" that just siphon a large percentage of royalties away from artists. I mention NFT but really I think it is the smart contracts part of Eth - from what I read these things are possible but really costly today. NFT and "token" could end up being marketing terms and the technical details about if something really is a "non-fungible token" could be fuzzy.- In the finance realm there may be possibilities beyond crypto currencies. Things like a way to build something like kickstarter/go fund me but for companies to secure funding (via eth smart contracts or some other mechanism) without an IPO that requires underwriting, banks, expensive lawyers, etc. Think of someone starting a knitting wholesale business, selling supplies and knitting plans but an early "investor" into the blockchain/NFT/thing is also a stakeholder in the business and maybe receive some dividend based on sales. I'm not an expert on this but from what I read this might be a possibility.In general I think web 3 is more about decentralization of funding models and decentralized ways for indie's to produce things.