Learn More
Resend Email
1
awesomeest
22d

Whilst procrastinating via semi-helpful browsing,(random blockchain news/info) I come across a new crypto that's really pushing for dev (advertising dev grants etc).

I click "why develop on *whatever*".

This is the start of the page it lead to:

"The Internet began with Web1, a read-only content delivery network. Users could only consume what was offered by site owners, which significantly limited their interaction with the web content."

I blink slowly a few times, figuratively scratch my head and leave.

Am I just too harsh on things like this? I mean, I get that internet history and knowing wtf web3 means is important and all...

Is it too high of a bar to expect a link, specifically trying to entice competent devs who are directly looking into a new web3/blockchain tech to dev with/on, lead to a page that starts with somewhat relative, to the originating link's stated topic, information?

Don't get me wrong, I definitely understand the frequent necessity to be pedantic... but starting with multiple paragraphs of internet history when the sole objective of the link is to inform/entice, specifically, competent devs, who are explicitly looking to leverage blockchain tech... just seems ridiculous.

Despite not actually super interested in changing or adding new blockchain tech to dev with in the near future (not dissatisfied with our relatively established groundwork/current approach), I was actually starting to consider branching out a bit to include initial functionality and/or tools/integrations with this protocol i wasnt aware of (not even just for grant $)... but if their idea of onboarding devs to build on their tech starts with an extremely pedantic intro as to Web1-3 basics... they must have a reeeeally low bar/very desperate for devs.

Seeing this makes me pretty certain it'd be easy/minimal effort to get a decent chunk of grant funding... but with a bar THAT low, I'm not wanting to be associated with them.

rant

dev

grant

blockchain

vara

pedantic

web3
Favorite
Ranter
Comments
  • 7
    22d
    remember: they're not trying to convince developers. because they can't, because they know whatever they're selling is bullshit.

    they're trying to convince the hapless managers who make the decisions and are easily swayed by a fancy, easy-to-understand presentation.
  • 3
    22d
    Honestly, Web3 is a smokepipe joke. It doesn't actually exist and it already missed It's time to exist.

    If someone actually makes some breakthrough in the way internet is used and serve, I strongly suggest they call it Web3 instead of web4, to override this old definition, because cryptos changed literally nothing in the end. We just have one more stock market in the form of ICOs and one more currency (well 4000 more) that are volatile as fuck and are more akin to gambling than investment. NFTs are an outright scam that even Ubisoft regrets entering and now It's done only by financial chads that think they have a good idea, or by indian scammers and the metaverse was dead on arrival and the only thing left is meta itself. Web3 is something that Marketing teams wanted to happen, but it didn't and now it wont.

    The only thing still kinda kicking around is decetralized services in general, but that's barely anything new and at mose deserve the tag Web2.1
  • 5
    22d
    I always cringe when I hear web 2.0 or web 3 or whatever. The web doesn‘t have a version. It‘s pure marketing bullshit.
  • 2
    22d
    @Hazarth if there’s one run by the devil company that deserves to rot in a shit pile it’s Ubisoft. I might even rank it lower than EA in terms of gaming companies only bc this time they’re releasing versions of games where you can get the base version for regular price or a version where it offers just slightly more content for almost double price. This is just one out of a million reasons why this bucket of piss from a pig with bladder cancer should disappear from this planet and be forgotten by fucking history
  • 1
    22d
    @Hazarth it’s even worse they even thought about NFT’s, theyre essentially a scam company trying to add even more scams to its list of evil schemes. But I guess NFTs are too scammy for even them (which shows how much of a scam nfts are to begin with)
  • 0
    21d
    @tosensei already said the most likely scenarios, but there is also the possibility that the peddlers of this specific Blockchain see themselves as much more than what they actually are.
    I've seen students turn in papers where they start by "defining what computers are" and "what efficiency means". Papers about graph algorithms. Like, Dijkstra and co, little-more-than-introductory algorithms.
    This self-aggrandizing "I am the chosen one, I will change the course of history from the beginning! And will tell allllll about it" is common among some sort of big headed people. Even more nowadays, when they can get ChatGPT to write their glorious memoir/manifest.
  • 0
    21d
    @tosensei wouldnt that take more than a few thousand bucks in grants?

    Im honestly clueless to that specific type of dynamic... never was around that level long enough (or paying enough attention) to witness that.
  • 1
    21d
    @Hazarth nah... it'll just be called something like "W" or ":\" with the way naming schemes are going... gen z, twitter > X, the name Meta being trademarked.

    ... ooo maybe someone will get the mass of countries with shared int domain over the indian ocean to let them build a large floating island in the middle that connects to a massive targeted satellite array to create a central, decentralised ownership, prime internet redundancy and universal gateway... and forcibly claim the domain of "Web.io" or "io.io" and that will be the next level!

    I mean, it sounds nuts, so I must be pretty close right?
Related Rants
devRant © 2021 Hexical Labs LLC
Privacy Policy  |  Terms of Service
Add Comment