Signal Founder: After creating two equity apps, I realized Web3 would be the wrong one.

I think I am a cryptographer, but I don't particularly like "Crypto". Also, I'm not so happy that my clients are learning how to turn everything from my life into a tool company.

However, strictly speaking, he failed to become a Christian. So, taking into account all the recent analyzes on what is now called web3, I decided to dig deeper into what happened in this area to understand what I would miss.

How do you see Web 1 and Web 2?

web3 is a loose term and it's hard to strictly observe what the purpose of web3 is, but the whole thesis is that web1 is decentralized, web2 centralizes everything on the platform, and web3 decentralizes everything again. web3 should provide a wealth of web2, but decentralized.

It can be good to understand why the root causes are happening. In my opinion, the explanation is simple.

People don't want to run their own servers, and they won't.The goal of web1 is that everyone on the Internet is not only an advertiser and a user, but also an advertiser and a user.

We each have our own website and webpage, our own messaging system, our own emails, and our own state servers to create our own logos. But - and I don't think I can say the most important thing - that's not what people want. People don't want to run their own servers.

Even nerds don't want to run their own servers just yet. Even full-time software development organizations don't want to manage their own servers just yet. If we want to understand something in the world, this is where people don't want to run their own servers. Companies that provide these services are more successful, and companies that recreate new features based on the capabilities of these networks are more successful.

The process is slower than the platform.Over 30 years later, emails haven't been encrypted, and WhatsApp hasn't been encrypted with full e2ee (end-to-end encryption) for less than a year. People are still trying to convince movies by IRC model, at the same time Slack allows you to create custom responsive face based emojis.

It is not a question of finances. When something is truly decentralized, it can be very difficult to replace and often crashes. It's a technology issue, as other parts of the ecosystem quickly evolve and fail.

But the web3 packages are different. Let's see. In order to understand this site faster and better understand what might happen in the future, I decided to create some dApps and build NFT.

Create decentralized applications

To experience the world of web3, I made a visualization for NFT and created a dApp called Autonomous Art where anyone can share tokens. The cost of visual acuity has increased over time and the participant's financial share has been distributed to all previous artists (see financial model similar to the pyramid scheme). At the time of this writing, over $ 38,000 has been spent on joint ventures.

We have also developed an app called First Derivative which allows you to create, discover and trade NFT derivatives that follow the NFTs below, similar to financial derivatives that follow assets.

Both let me know how the site works. Clearly, the application itself is not particularly "decentralized". It's just a website. “Decentralization” refers to the location of states and the logic / rules to change the state of the blockchain rather than in a “centralized” database.

One thing I have always wondered about when it comes to the cryptocurrency world is dissatisfaction with the user / server interface. When people talk about blockchain, they talk about trust, government approvals and all the processes by which it works, but ultimately leads to the fact that consumers cannot participate in this process. All diagrams are servers, the trust model is between servers, and everything is about servers. Although the blockchain is designed to be a peer-to-peer network, it does not allow mobile devices or browsers to be one of these nodes.

With the move to mobile, we are now more stable in the world of users and servers. The first cannot play the second, and these problems seem more important than before. At the same time, Ethereum has called its servers "users", so there is no word for the actual, unreliable user / server intervention that should be in place, and no one guarantees that if it is over, there will eventually be millions more. interfaces. more users than server.

For example, whether it's a mobile device or a website, dApps like Autonomous Art or First Derivative must interact with the blockchain in some way to modify or spell it out. , etc.). However, because blockchain is not available on mobile devices (or because it is not available on desktop browsers), it can be inconvenient for users. So your choice is only affected with the blockchain by one of the operations moving away from the location of the server.

server! But as we all know, people don't want to run their own servers. Along the way, companies have emerged that sell API access to Ethereum nodes running as a service, while also providing monitoring access, API enhancements put it at the top of the Ethereum API, and of the company's history. ... the voice knows. In this case, there are two companies. Almost all dApps use Infura or Alchemy to interact with the blockchain. In fact, even if you link a wallet like MetaMask to dApp and dApp interacts with the wallet blockchain, MetaMask just calls Infura!

These API users do not use anything to identify the state of the blockchain or the accuracy of the response. The results have not yet been signed.Apps like Autonomous Art say, “What are the benefits of this vision in this smart contract? Alchemy or Infura responds with a JSON blob that says "this is a version" and the application triggers it.

It surprised me. A lot of work, energy, and time went into creating an unreliable deal, but nearly every consumer who needs access to do so is relying on the results of these two companies without further evidence. . It doesn't seem like the best case of confidentiality. Consider that whenever you interact with a website in Chrome, the request is first sent to Google, then sent to the site and restarted. This is what is happening with Ethereum today. All the scripts are clearly exposed to the blockchain, but these companies can see almost any request read by almost any user around a dApp.

Blockchain proponents can argue that it doesn't matter what kind of intermediary integration occurs. Since the state itself exists on the blockchain, if the platforms aren't functioning properly, users can move to another location. But I think it's just a glimpse of the platform as it is.

Let’s give an example.

Create NFTs

I also want to be always more NFT. While most people think of NFTs, they think of digital graphics and charts, but most NFTs don't store this information on strings. For most NFTs for most images it is very expensive.

NFTs do not store data on strings, but have URLs pointing to the data. What amazes me with this pattern is that there is no contract hash for the file in the URL. If you look at many NFTs in the popular marketplace selling for tens, hundreds, or millions of dollars, the URL usually points to a VPS running Apache.

Anyone who has access to the machine, who buys the domain name in the future, or someone who broke the machine can change the image, name, description, etc. of NFT as it sees fit. own token "it)"). There is nothing in the NFT specification that tells you whether the image should "be" or decide if it is a "published" image.

So as an experiment I created an NFT that works for different images depending on who is watching because the web server image server can choose to live different images of the IP or user agent of the applicant. For example, it looks very different from OpenSea and different from Rarible, but it still shows up as a big emoji when you buy it and view it in a cryptocurrency wallet. NFT you guess is not what you get. Nothing special about this NFT. This is how the NFT specification is created. Most of the more expensive NFTs can be converted to emojis at any time.

I just made it clear.

A few days later, the NFT I created was removed from OpenSea without notice or explanation.

The deletion indicates that I violated certain terms of service, but after reading the terms I did not see anything that restricted NFTs. , as I explain to the audience, the NFT changes depending on how you look at it.

But the most interesting thing is that after OpenSea removed my NFTIt will not appear in my device's crypto wallet.. It's web3, but how does it work?

Encrypted wallets like MetaMask and Rainbow are "non-manager" (private keys stored on user), but have the same problem as my dApps above. Wallet must be run on your mobile phone or browser. At the same time, the design concept of Ethereum and other blockchains is a network of peer relationships, but it is not created by this method. This means that your cell phone or browser can be one of these nodes.

Wallets like MetaMask require simple tasks like viewing balances, recent conversions and NFTs, as well as more complex tasks like starting a business, engaging with smart contracts, and more. In fact, MetaMask should interact with the blockchain, but the implementation of a blockchain prevents users like MetaMask from interacting with the blockchain. So, like my dApp, MetaMask achieves this by calling APIs for 3 companies collaborating in the region.

Again, like my dApp, this answer is not guaranteed in any way. They haven't signed yet to prove they're lying.It reuses the same connection, same TLS chat card, etc. for each account in the wallet, so if you manage multiple accounts in your wallet to handle a separation Personally, your business will know that this money is connected.

MetaMask doesn't do much, it just monitors the data provided by APIs in the middle. This is not a special problem for MetaMask. Are there any alternatives? Platforms like Rainbow are configured in exactly the same way.

This all means that once NFTs are removed from OpenSea, they will still disappear from your wallet.My NFT has never been deleted from the blockchain space. It's not a problem to work because the wallet uses the OpenSea API to publish NFTs and start again 304 No Content to query NFTs where I live!

recreate the world

What's different with web3, given the history of how web1 has become web2, is that technology like Ethereum has created many different concepts like web1. To allow the use of this technology, sites have been integrated around… platforms. again. The people who will manage the servers for you and use the new features that appear. Infura, OpenSea, Coinbase, Etherscan.

Likewise, the web3 protocol was subtle. When creating a derivative, it is best to consider the value of the derivative as a percentage of its base value. This information is not in the string, but in the API provided by OpenSea. People are excited about the benefits of NFT debt for developers, but since no debt was listed in ERC-721 and it's too late to change, OpenSea has its own way of improving the value of sites. Web2.Quickly iterate over the root platformBeyond a decentralized process, shared management is possible on the platform.

Given these changes, I don't think it's surprising that we're already in the position where your cryptocurrency wallet thinks your NFT and OpenSea thinks your NFT. I think you shouldn't be surprised that OpenSea isn't a pure "look" that you can change. Because they're not busy iterating the platform beyond the impossible or the hard-to-change.

I think this is similar to email events. I can run my own mail server, but there are no issues with functionality, privacy, denial of censorship, or control. Because GMail is the flip side of every email I send or receive.When a decentralized ecosystem is focused on a single platform for convenience, it will be the worst of both worlds. Centralized control, but also decentralized enough to get bogged down in time.I can start my own NFT business, but that wouldn't give me more control if OpenSea were to decide to look at all NFTs in a human wallet (and every other application in the ecosystem).

This is not a complaint against OpenSea or what they create. Instead, they're trying to make something that works. You have to expect the integration of this platform to happen, and given the design capabilities still, I think a setup like this will give you what you want. But my thoughts and concerns are that the web3 community needs different results than what we have seen.

it's too early

"It's in its infancy" is the adverb that people in the Web3 domain see the most when talking about problems.In some ways, cryptocurrencies were targeted over a decade ago, so they have yet to reach the basic engineering stages that can be considered the end of the "rookie" era. .

But even if this is just the start (and most likely will be!), I'm not sure how much comfort to consider. I think the opposite will be true. Completion of these technologies seems to be fundamental in platforms, which doesn't affect the speed of the ecosystem, and most of the participants don't even know or think it exists.

This would indicate that the distribution of a tax is less likely to be direct or meaningful to the majority of people below. Only the degree of decentralization that people need is the minimum required to have something, unless you are thinking about it. , this energy will push us further, not closer, through the best results.

But you can't stop the heat.

Come to think of it, OpenSea could be a lot "better" in direct understanding if all the web3 partitions were gone. Each is faster, cheaper, and easier to use. For example, to accept an offer for NFT, you would have to pay $ 80 or more for $ 150 or more at the Ethereum exchange rate. This sets a lower limit for each race. Otherwise, you will lose money by accepting an offer below your gasoline price. Credit card payments seem expensive compared to credit cards, but they generally seem cheaper. OpenSea can also easily publish live data when users want to identify their account using public data from trades, statements, predictions, etc.

However, I don't think it will be successful if you create a platform where you can buy and sell non-crypto-based images. Not because it is not decentralized, but because, as we have seen, a lot of the things it is supposed to do is wrong. I don't think so because it's hot.People think of cryptocurrencies to make money, and these people want to use cryptocurrencies in a way that encourages investment while translating the environment into real estate trading by offering cash back. .

Supporters of TVN are initially dissatisfied with the trust or payment model, but with the destination of the money. Thus, the investment will attract people to OpenSea and improve the experience by creating a platform that replaces the simple web3 protocol in the web2 and ultimately gives you the capabilities to "create NFTs by OpenSea itself rather than by your own smart contracts Everyone opens the door to Coinbase to access the latest NFT activity on the debit card platform.

This opens up the possibility for Coinbase to control the privacy of their tokens through the dark pool owned by Coinbase, eliminating exchange rates and avoiding interference with smart contracts. Eventually all the web3 parts were gone and there was a place to buy and sell jpegs with a debit card.Due to the strong market, the project could not be a Web2 platform from the start, but with the same business strategy and management base, it was able to become a Web2 platform.

At the end of the group, the NFT artists are happy with this breakthrough because it means more thought / investment in their images, but if the goal of web3 is to avoid web2 the problem then we have to ask ourselves if this has ever happened to the new contracts. In the future, he will have to give up other natural wonders.

I think these wars are likely to continue, and in my opinion the question is how long the big cryptocurrency stock will end up in the engines or the funnels. As the money from the NFT returns to the crypto space, it can be accelerated forever (whether only web2x2 or not). When it comes out loose it turns into a storm. Personally, I think there are enough taps to make it work and it just makes enough money for the fan not to click enough. In situations like this, it's worth thinking about how quickly web3 can be avoided as web2x2 (web2 but not free).

You might not be smart enough.

I fumbled in web3's water for a while. But from the perspective of these small plans, it's easy to see why so many people find the web3 ecosystem so clean. I don't think it's settling us down from rooted platforms, I don't think it's going to change our relationship to tech, and I think the story is less secret than the online model (which is a fairly low model. !), but I also understand why geeks like me were so excited about it.This is new, at least at the outdated level. It creates a sort of creation / exploration space reminiscent of the early days of the Internet.Ironically, part of this creativity comes from the limitations that make web3 unreliable.

If you want to change your relation to technology, I think you have to make sure. My simple idea is to guess:

First, we must accept the assurance that people will not be running their own servers creating systems that can compromise reliability without interfering with the process.This means that while the developer can trust and comply with the consequences of the importance of user / server relationships, they use encryption (not infrastructure) to distribute trust. Even though web3 was created by "encryption" one of the things that surprised me was that there seemed to be so little impact!

Second, the burden of using the software should be reduced.At present, the project software needs a lot of personnel. Even a simple application forces a group to sit in front of a computer for eight hours a day, every day, forever. It's not always like that. There was a time when 50 employees in a software project weren't considered a “small group”.

As long as the software needs a combination of energy and unique functionality for people, I think it would be nice to work for the people sitting in this room every day rather than the overall goal that we want it to be. it either. I believe that if we are to change our relationship with technology, we have to make software easier. But all my life I have seen the opposite happen. Sadly.