Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

birdlives_ma t1_j4191na wrote

I'd argue that it didn't hit a plateau so much as it... never actually happened. I've yet to find a "decentralized" app/NFT/database/anything, that doesn't rely on centralized infrastructure like AWS or Piñata.

There would totally be utility and societal benefits to decentralizing digital infrastructure. But there's no money in doing so, and no incentive for the companies that own the centralized infrastructure to allow it to happen. Failing that, it's just an advertising buzzword.

78

dwkdnvr t1_j41zg3f wrote

Exactly - a properly conceived decentralized system is basically impossible to monetize, and so there is very little to no incentive for any company with R&D $$$ available to explore it.

There will certainly be continued academic research, but how you grow a user community large enough to be useful is a bit of a question when

a) there's no money in it

b) you have to assume everyone is a bad actor and will attempt to exploit/co-opt the system wherever possible

22

PompiPompi t1_j43adcx wrote

When you assume the worst case scenario, your algorithm will get the worst performance.

1

BardicSense t1_j45ptis wrote

Why not assume the best in people until empirical evidence provides you with no room for benefits of the doubt? After all, if human nature is ultimately mostly corrupt, as your assumption might suggest, then it matters little what good your decentralized system might try to do if it will ultimately be corrupted and exploited.

Instead you should give people lots of leeway and benefits of the doubt, and if you detect certain rhetoric that is based on a well established pattern of misinformation campaigns or some type of nefarious propaganda, then you eliminate the user's access or whatever, but it seems like being a control freak about the whole thing is the opposite intention of what decentralization was supposed to be.

−1

regalAugur t1_j46dj96 wrote

we've already seen how people interact on the internet

2

BardicSense t1_j46llvg wrote

Yeah but different platforms with different rules encourage different types of interaction. People act differently on different sites. Theres a lot of effort going into designing ways to encourage prosocial behavior through "nudging" and various other psychological tricks. I dont believe that the perfect algorithm or website design exists that would make everyone suddenly wonderful and excellent to each other, but curbing people from having total meltdowns, making rage filled rants, or stalking/harrassing people, would be a good thing.

The point is humanity is still in its early infancy with its use of internet technology. 1991 is when it went public, and the species might need some time to adjust properly to this new capacity for communication. We dont know for sure that it has to end in a corporate sponsored dumpster fire every time. I think theres hope for improvement.

1

Lord0fHats t1_j43i02d wrote

Anyone who knows how the internet works looks at a lot of the lofty promises decentralization proposes and says 'that's just the internet we already have with extra steps you want me to pay for so we can pretend we've reinvented something.'

It always goes right back to infrastructure and infrastructure isn't just expensive, it's centralized. Decentralization was an illusion promised by people who either didn't know how things worked, or wanted your money and were willing to bend the truth hard.

15

crua9 t1_j44wlaq wrote

>Decentralization was an illusion promised by people who either didn't know how things worked, or wanted your money and were willing to bend the truth hard.

IDK AI and software can run a company and take out loans without a human outside of DeFI and DAO.....

1

quaintSloe OP t1_j41spm3 wrote

But in all honesty, there are some things that can improve things. Over the past two years, each data leak is breaking new records. There has to be a time when these centralized institutions just find decentralization as the less of two evils at least.

Buzz words definitely hindered its development, though. I throw up a little everytime I hear crypto buzzwords

3

pab_guy t1_j42g1c5 wrote

How does creating a public ledger solve for data leaks?

10

Xist3nce t1_j44a8az wrote

The “Buzzwords” are happening for a reason. When the face of your tech is 99% scams because there’s no profit in it besides scams, you’re going to have a bad look. Pretending that it’s not the case lumps you in with them. Way I see it, propose an actual use that isn’t just a scam, proof of concept, then figure out how companies can exploit it for cash. Then you get widespread adoption.

4

crua9 t1_j44xm8l wrote

IDK if it will help with leaks. Like I don't see how.

But there is things like DAO that are already a thing, but is being worked on. These are companies that are ran by software. Like there is no manager or CEO. Most are more a hobby thing, but some are legit companies. Then you have DeFi where you can get a loan. In fact, anyone can or anything can including software/AI. Where this is currently impossible with the normal system.

​

Like there is serious plus sides to it. It's just really early on. Like one of the thoughts is the gov is working one a CBDC which includes a decentralized system. Your ID will be tied to it, and there is pros and cons to that. But one of the neat things is since the gov and given groups are the only ones access to the ledger. And the groups you can control what they see. It is possible to store medical records on it. Meaning the day of someone going doctor to doctor to get drugs to get high is over. Plus, your medical record will show up in real time instead of a hospital having to pull some request which can take days or weeks.

0

quick_dudley t1_j435e6a wrote

I have actually been using a decentralised social network called Scuttlebutt. Unfortunately getting started with it is a bit more complex than the centralised versions but after the initial hurdle it's pretty pleasant.

2

mrpoops t1_j450ymb wrote

Just read up on it, link is here:

https://scuttlebutt.nz/get-started/

The setup process means it’s DOA. You have to let it sync for an hour before you can use it? Good lord…I feel like iOS won’t even let me download something in the background for an hour, you’d have to adjust your screen lock and stuff.

Also…how much space is it using on your phone? That shit ain’t cheap.

2

ah-tzib-of-alaska t1_j44l7vi wrote

the real nft boom will be boring. Just like .com's are way more prevalent now than in the .com bubble and burst, but less valuable without all the crazy speculation. Just like Holland has more Tulips now then back during the craze.

2

cosmic_backlash t1_j44uwo1 wrote

There's also a LOT of reasons not to have decentralization. There are tradeoffs and people were sold a shitty dream.

2

Nwcray t1_j4647hm wrote

Web 1.0 was pretty decentralized.

I mean - everyone used Internet Explorer as their browser, but my point is that there really wasn’t the same big corporate feel to the web.

We had it, we liked it, and in the name of progress we lost it.

2

crua9 t1_j44wfth wrote

>I've yet to find a "decentralized" app/NFT/database/anything, that doesn't rely on centralized infrastructure like AWS or Piñata.

IPFS. It's basically a decentralized file storage and web hosting service.

Curve DeFI, where you or even AI can get loans.

There is a number of other things. Much of it you kind of need to be in the know to get to it because it is complicated at this time.

1

Sethdarkus t1_j45hba9 wrote

Wait till Flexa comes out with their rail systems it would move money far faster abs far cheaper than any bank could with zero risk of being out money

1

jdbrew t1_j45shxu wrote

There’s decentralized social media with Mastodon, and the decentralized aspect is it’s main hindrance to hitting critical mass in a time where everyone was eager to find a different social media platform

1