Web 3.0 is not like web2.0, why call it web3.0?

[randomstrings]

Like web2 is like social bookmark and wiki links and all, while web3.0 is blcokchain, why calling it web3.0, any idea?

 

[rafark]

Marketing.

 

[spectrejoe]

Like web2 is like social bookmark and wiki links and all, while web3.0 is blcokchain, why calling it web3.0, any idea?

Web1.0 was static websites.
Web2.0 allowed people to publish & interact with content and other publishers.
Web3.0 allows decentralization (freedom) of web2.0

 

[Gogol]

Web1.0 was static websites.
Web2.0 allowed people to publish & interact with content and other publishers.
Web3.0 allows decentralization (freedom) of web2.0

Tell me, how is it decentralised when you are talking to a server ultimately?

Anyway, afaik, web 1.0 was normal internet. Web 2.0 was about social logins without password, and web 3.0 is the same thing as web 2.0, but decentralised.
Yeah, this is open for interpretation and can vastly differ depending on whom you are talking to. However, decentralised password less systems are just an eye wash imo. You are still not talking to the blockchain, but an api server (infura??). Sugar coated shit is what i think it is.

 

[randomstrings]

Web 1 and web 2 were related, web3 is totally different definition.

 

[Gogol]

web3 is totally different definition.

Please define.

 

[TheOverlord]

Ironically, Web 1.0 was actually considered somewhat decentralized due to the lack of major publishers and general freedom of everyone who wanted to make a website

 

[OccultKingdoms]

1. Scam (imagine it 50 years ago).
2. Fancy naming of tech-related people who don't know how to name things for the plebe, so they used "already familiar".
3. 3.0 sounds better than 1.0 or no version at all.
4. Marketing was already mentioned in points 2 and 3, but that's not an issue at all to mention it in point 4 since it's allowed by the code of conduct.
5. Delusion.
6. Progress in finances that might occur weird to some, but in reality, it's the fin-tech industry doing it's job. For god's sake. You don't want to hear about payday loans you haven't paid all day long. Right?

 

[nersande]

The phrase describes the shift. It is also used to indicate that it is something new / very different than what was there before.

Web2 was used to indicate the total change versus the static web1 interface. It was not just a few new apps, but that suddenly everybody was a contributer / writer / sharer / participant - which was very different to web2. It demonstrated the power one individual could have without having to rent out a TV or radio station or newspaper.

Web3 fits quite well because it showcases the rise of decentralized tools and apps - with web3 everybody can document who they are and what they can do. The 3 has less to do with web and more to do with how we use the net. I recommend reading up a bit on banking the unbanked, digital id in developping worlds. NFT - often seen as gimick and rightfully so - are far more about being able to document a chain / proof than stupig jpegs. It is feasible with the blockchain to show you where your pack of eggs has come from.

Is it marketing? sure there is that aspect with it as well as it had been with web2. That does not take away from the fact that 'web3' will change our thinking like 'web2' has changed it.

 

[spectrejoe]

Tell me, how is it decentralised when you are talking to a server ultimately?

Anyway, afaik, web 1.0 was normal internet. Web 2.0 was about social logins without password, and web 3.0 is the same thing as web 2.0, but decentralised.
Yeah, this is open for interpretation and can vastly differ depending on whom you are talking to. However, decentralised password less systems are just an eye wash imo. You are still not talking to the blockchain, but an api server (infura??). Sugar coated shit is what i think it is.

The server is descentralized and ran by everyone not by a single entity hence decentralization

 

[Gogol]

The server is descentralized and ran by everyone not by a single entity hence decentralization

Totally wrong. If you “trust” a response from a server, it is not decentralised. You are not waiting for “agreement” in this case. I think you should read a bit more.

 

[OccultKingdoms]

Web 2.0 was about social logins without password,

Web 2.0 was about posting SEO links and using filler content to seem like an authority within a week.
The times are gone now.

 

[Gogol]

Web 2.0 was about posting SEO links and using filler content to seem like an authority within a week.
The times are gone now.

From seo perspective, yepp. But that’s not what they are talking about right now. The web x.x phrase is ambiguous in that sense.

 

[spectrejoe]

Totally wrong. If you “trust” a response from a server, it is not decentralised. You are not waiting for “agreement” in this case. I think you should read a bit more.

The response is not provided by a single entity I dont think you understand how a blockchain works

 

[Gogol]

The response is not provided by a single entity I dont think you understand how a blockchain works

Bruh, most of the time, you are speaking to infura (or a competitor), not a blockchain directly. In fact, it is impossible to query blockchain directly from the browser side. Go read more and come back to me.

 

[Cheapsocial.top6789]

I think web 3.0 is new game in blockchain 2021 - 2022, it will become games like 2018 - 2019, Coin lending, ICO ...vvv

 

[Luke22]

Tell me, how is it decentralised when you are talking to a server ultimately?

Actually you are not correct in that statement. In web3.0 you are taking with smart contracts, which are block of code on Blockchain, each request are proceeding with Blockchain recourses, not a centralised server. This makes a slight difference and allow everyone to check what happens on their request.

 

[Gogol]

Actually you are not correct in that statement. In web3.0 you are taking with smart contract, which are block of code on Blockchain, each request are proceeding with Blockchain recourses, not a centralised server. This makes a slight difference and allow everyone to check what happens on their request.

No you are not talking to a smart contract. You are talking to a proxy that talks to a smart contract through its backend. Guys, atleast get your facts straight before coming at me. Wtf? If that proxy is hijacked, your response is fucked as well.

 

[shinycakes]

Web 3 was first used by Gavin Wood (Co-founder of Ethereum) a few years ago. VC firms anbd influencers picked it up because it's a cool story to sell plebs their coins.

The story is sth like web1=data collection; web2=means of communication; web3=ownership.

So you own your profile pic or in-game stuff. The complete commercialization and financialization of anything digital.

It's advertized as being decentral. But idk how can it be decentral when the people holding the most coins can overpower every decision?

Though I kinda like the MLM and gambling aspect of it. Also if you into fraud it provides a whole new set of possibilities.

 

[AKQJ10]

Tell me, how is it decentralised when you are talking to a server ultimately?

Anyway, afaik, web 1.0 was normal internet. Web 2.0 was about social logins without password, and web 3.0 is the same thing as web 2.0, but decentralised.
Yeah, this is open for interpretation and can vastly differ depending on whom you are talking to. However, decentralised password less systems are just an eye wash imo. You are still not talking to the blockchain, but an api server (infura??). Sugar coated shit is what i think it is.

You’re talking to not one but multiple servers, or nodes. Ipfs is an example.

Also, decentralized web3 used to define how data is stored, not how it’s provided. It’s a completely different topic.