(no title)
antoinec | 4 years ago
"Web2" makes us think that we can delete whatever we post, or what we send is not going to be stored. And we believe it because it is technically possible, even though we don't have any way to double check.
If a service claims that you can delete/hide whatever data you uploaded on the blockchain, you'd be able to verify it and not only trust them. And if you are told that using this service, there is no way to delete it, and that anybody can see it, you might avoid doing something that you'd have done with web2 and regretted later.
qbasic_forever|4 years ago
The web3 dream of nothing is ever deleted is going to have to hit the brick wall of reality that we as a society agree to follow laws that explicitly allow deleting and removing content. You need a judicial solution to change that, not just a technology one.
azangru|4 years ago
Can a judge order you to do something that is not possible? For example, if you were offering an end-to-end encrypted messaging service, can the judge order you to provide a decrypted version of a user's correspondence?
> The web3 dream of nothing is ever deleted is going to have to hit the brick wall of reality that we as a society agree to follow laws that explicitly allow deleting and removing content. You need a judicial solution to change that, not just a technology one.
Yes, I think that's why Balaji Srinivasan is talking about "network states", and "layer 0" (the ideological and legal layer) of cryptocurrencies.
Jcowell|4 years ago
Barrin92|4 years ago
Given that the the two most important features of a blockchain are decentralization and immutability how would any service ever be able to guarantee me that? That implies they own the blockchain, in which case it's just a slow database.
antoinec|4 years ago
Hamcha|4 years ago
Web3 seems to work the opposite way. The tech works like that, so the world better adapt to it.
I can't believe I'm saying this, but for once I'm happy that it's not technicians that make the laws.