| > The web is not decentralized today. We are routing vast majority of web traffic through a handful of monopolies that control all forms of monetization THAT'S NOT THE WEB! I also reject the claim that they represent the vast majority of the traffic > No, it's not. It is perfectly okay to sell food to anyone but it's not OK to sell any kind of food, clothes, or any other product. so I want to know who's selling the food to me. suppose I buy some food from you and end up in the ER to get my stomach pumped. Who is responsible? what's their name and address? > it is really okay my dude. can you sell dog meat? and what makes web3 better since it would allow it with no consequences? > Google Search isn't a deterministic cryptographic computation engine so what? do you really think google is not using every trick in the book to keep their search engine running? (including decentralization) do you really think that "decentralization" means no downtime, because MAGIC? > It's a manipulated, censored, monopoly-owned search engine that propels its own products and services to the top. web3 is THE PRODUCT so some uber rich entity can amass more coins, without any regulation sounds better to you? > What's your big idea for dealing with the above? alternative real platforms, not alternative dream platforms. GNU Taler IMO is a better option for people looking for anonymity and it works with the current system, not against it. But, again, there is no money in Taker, no going to the moon, no pump and dump, no get rich quick. If you were looking for a solution, you'll invest in something more like Taker than web3, and yet... but seriously, taking a stance against those actions through political means, it has orders of magnitude more chances of success. because if you think that what's censored today will be tolerated tomorrow because CRYPTO you're delusional. ANYWAY you have not answered my question: why would I go through all those lengths to run a web site, while today gitlab pages is free and works as intended? if you think that the proposition of crypto is (unproven) resistance to censorship, than you should sell the solution to those that have been censored, not to me.
why are you selling to the general public something that has no value for the general public (and would cost them more)? my feeling is that the people who would be interested in it are not the kind of people you would make business with or there's literally no money to be made (I doubt helping Tibetan people is interesting enough for crypto maniacs, they aren't rich and are not interested in making money)... |