this post was submitted on 12 Jul 2023
578 points (100.0% liked)

196

16597 readers
1800 users here now

Be sure to follow the rule before you head out.

Rule: You must post before you leave.

^other^ ^rules^

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 
top 35 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 64 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

Wasn't it web 2.0? Also, good point, I always thought it was weird. Though it's kinda obvious it's about money.

[–] [email protected] 16 points 1 year ago (1 children)
[–] kakes 13 points 1 year ago (2 children)

"Web 3.0" is a term used to refer to distributed blockchain-based web services, in case anyone's curious.

Though with the uptick in Lemmy I wonder if that term will end up being generalized to things like ActivityPub. One can hope.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 1 year ago

Honestly i'm pretty sure blockchain just co-opted the web3.0 term, i recall it being used for general decentralization in the past.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 1 year ago

at this point let's just let them have it. we'll just be web 4.0

[–] [email protected] 29 points 1 year ago

What's the point of putting stuff on the WEB if it can't be accessed from a WEB BROWSER

[–] [email protected] 23 points 1 year ago (4 children)

It's Web 2.0 dummy, Web 3.0 is crypto and NFTs

[–] [email protected] 19 points 1 year ago

So Web 1.0 was just the normal internet, created by users and companies.

Web 2.0 are the sites that try to consolidate and capture user-created content as their primary content. Link aggregation, art posts, etc.

Web 3.0 is the scam pushed by blockchain enthusiasts.

Will Web 4.0 be dubbed the AI web? Where anytime you use a search, browse a catalog or gallery or do almost anything else you interact through an AI?

[–] [email protected] 17 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Is Lemmy not also 3.0? It's decentralized. Tho maybe because it's still servers/hosting at the end of the day maybe not?

[–] [email protected] 14 points 1 year ago (2 children)

I'm pretty sure the term Web 3.0 was created by cryptobros to promote their stuff

I don't think Lemmy counts because you are still using the head server instead of being self-hosted

[–] [email protected] 8 points 1 year ago

Eh ok, Web3 seems to be pretty hazy and loosely defined so I'm inclined to believe you're right about it being just a buzzword basically.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 1 year ago (1 children)
[–] [email protected] 5 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Show me where is my self hosting setup with the dedicated IP and a server rack running then lol

You're just using someone else's server, just like you did in Web 1.0, it's not self-hosted at all

[–] [email protected] 6 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

I'm hosting and using my own instance personally, but the important part is that it's decentralized and federated. Think of it like email - businesses often have their own email servers they use to communicate with yours, unlike on Facebook or Reddit where all of it happens on their servers.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Exactly, there's a difference between self-hosted networks like meshes and mostly privately hosted. It's like calling all email self-hosted, even though less than 1% of users self-host.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

As far as I know, they never claimed Lemmy was entirely self-hosted. Their intention was likely to say it can be, in which case decentralized would've been more clear..

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

The original commenter said that "Lemmy is self-hosted". This is what this comment thread was about. It sure is decentralized, not really self-hosted, even though you can host it youself.

Edit: read another comment wrong

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I'm aware of the original comment. I also agree that Lemmy can't be referred to as self hosted in the same way that Plex can, for example. I simply think they meant to say "can be" self hosted instead of "is".

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago

Just look at their comments. They full on say it's a self-hosted platform no matter what, even though most people don't host it and all of them don't have to host it.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

You can host your own instance, it’s not that hard. Just because you can share someone else’s self hosted instance or a larger one doesn’t make it magically different. Learn how the fediverse works.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago

Yeah, just like email. Doesn't make email a self-hosted service.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Web 3.0 is literally only a thing I've seen crypto people talk about. Decentralized infrastructure has been around for ages without that language, and the only projects I see using Web 3 language is crypto currency nonsense.

If anything, Web 3.0 seems allergic to actually decentralized infrastructure beyond telling people who lose money on crypto exchanges to run their own hardware wallet; https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Web3#Not_decentralised

[–] kakes 5 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Imo "web 3.0" is a cool idea in theory, but never quite reached its potential. I posted this elsewhere, but imo the term should be generalized to include non-blockchain decentralization.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago

I strongly disagree. If it's a term pushed by scam artists, trying to coopt the term for non-scam projects just makes it easier for scammers to seem legitimate. Also decentralized infrastructure has been around for ages and at it's heart is running on the same software web 2.0 is based on, why is it "3.0" all of a sudden?

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Proposal: Since Web 3.0 was once standing for decentralization and has been coopted by crypto, we should name our decentralized-only thing Web NT 3.0. You know, like New Technology. Like that spinoff Windows with a new kernel which eventually replaced the aging DOS kernel.

[–] famousringo 5 points 1 year ago

You’re right. They should’ve called apps web 3.0, but then the web guys might have to admit that a big reason why people flocked to apps is because of how much they’d already enshittified the web at that point.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I thought 2.0 was defined by SaaS, and 3.0 IoT 🤷‍♂️

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago

I'm pretty sure those are separate parallel terms, like IoT can be in Web 2.0 (website connectivity) and Web 3.0 (blockchain interconnectivity some IT CEOs were pushing)

[–] [email protected] 22 points 1 year ago (1 children)

It’s tough for me because I love native app experiences but most are so invasive. I won’t be surprised when companies drop websites completely.

The whole Reddit saga had me re-evaluate my social media use.

For Meta I switched just to the mobile sites and noticed that with Messenger, it can’t even be accessed from the browser, and Instagram won’t even let you login unless you turn off private relay. I doubt we’ll ever get a threads website.

Now if I use a native app, it is only ones that collect as little data as possible. I use Dystopia for Reddit occasionally, Ice Cubes for Mastodon, Memmy for Lemmy and Surfboard for Tildes.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 1 year ago (1 children)

The browser is a political statement that the user should be the one to control how the page is displayed. The native app is the opposite, a statement that the corporation should be the one to control how the page is displayed.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

we need to make tinkering with apps easier. the tech is already there with zygisk and xposed and modded apps in general but creating mods are the hard part.

ios jailbreaking had a tweak called flex at one point which was pretty good albeit paid and limited. we need to make a better flex for android so people can actually make mods as opposed to download shady pre-modded apks.

browsers already have userscripts and userstyles, though they seem to be falling out of use in favor of purpose made extensions

[–] [email protected] 10 points 1 year ago

You force me to use your app, you force me to use another website.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 1 year ago

I swear to god if I hear web plus number one more fucking time.

[–] darcy 3 points 1 year ago

I HATE WEB 3 I HATE WEB 3 I HATE WEB 3

please can we go back to html, maybe css, and NO JS.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago

FEED US YOUR DATA BEEP BOOP

Argh, rule, now I have to find something to post before I go.

load more comments
view more: next ›