Yofine

Original Article: The Web3 Fraud

Author's viewpoint: Web3 is a scam.

1. The decentralization promoted by web3 is not a new concept and has already existed in other distributed systems.
2. The voting mechanism is easily exploited by attackers who manipulate the voting results through puppets.
3. Decentralized systems lack the role of gatekeepers played by internet giants, making it inefficient in handling illegal activities.
4. By comparing the costs of maintaining web2 and web3 applications, the high cost of web3 is reflected, mainly due to gas fees. Some alternatives to Ethereum have lower costs, but they are still much higher than conventional solutions.
5. Web3 is essentially a Ponzi scheme.
6. Even basic testing of web3 by programmers requires spending cryptocurrency, which serves the purpose of cryptocurrency fundraising even if web3 ultimately fails.

Based on the author's background as a senior security researcher and lecturer at the University of California, Berkeley, I agree relatively with the security issues mentioned in the second point, but I have different interpretations of other viewpoints:

1. Many technical concepts can be traced back to old time points, but these concepts can also have different uses in different eras. While false advertising may exist, my understanding of decentralized systems is different from traditional distributed systems, mainly in terms of ownership of the system, rather than just technical decentralization.
2. I am not knowledgeable enough about security, so I initially agree with the expert's viewpoint.
3. I feel that mapping to the real world, democratic systems and authoritarian systems each have their advantages and disadvantages. I won't delve into it, but I can only say that if I were a citizen, I would choose democracy, and if I were in the ruling class, I would choose authoritarianism.
4. Gas fees are currently unreasonable, but I believe this is a cost control issue during the transition between old and new eras. It's like comparing a horse-drawn carriage to a newly invented car or a conventional fuel car to a new energy vehicle. There will always be some problems. For example, if you compare a horse-drawn carriage to a car, you will always conclude that the former is better. But times are progressing, and the wheels of history are moving forward.
5. Through recent superficial observations, I do not rule out the possibility that some DAOs are doing similar things, but I believe that the vision of DAO itself is good. Cars were invented to improve transportation efficiency, but they can also be used for killing, such as in more serious traffic accidents. The emergence of new things always comes with risks. It still depends on whether the original logic is reasonable. We shouldn't throw the baby out with the bathwater.
6. This point can be confirmed as incorrect. Basic testing can be done using test networks, and there are channels to apply for free ETH. Recently, I completed a tutorial on buildspace, which involved creating a DAO, minting NFTs, and conducting token airdrops, all done on the Rinkeby test network without incurring real costs.

Overall, I myself have just entered this field and am still catching up on various knowledge. However, I strongly agree with the vision of web3 and DAO. On one hand, it is an upgrade of monetization methods on the internet, turning users from commodities back into people. On the other hand, it is about the future of humanity. There may come a day when we face a major crisis that requires the entire human race to unite. If the Earth is already a complete organization by then, there may be lower-cost ways of dealing with it. Instead of unifying through war, I hope for a subtle reorganization in the form of DAO or something similar, forming a community of shared destiny.

These may be some shallow viewpoints, but most likely no one will read what I write, so let it be considered rambling.