Hacker News Reader

Comment by paulgb | Hacker News Reader

I agree that it's a shame, but looking back at “web 2.0”, wasn't it kind of the same? I'm absolutely guilty about being excited about it at the time, but in retrospect, a bunch of rounded corners and incremental inclusion of Ajax didn't really warrant a SemVer major version update either.

Edit: actually, maybe the justification of the SemVer bump is that people stopped caring about IE5 support :)

View on HN

Web 2.0 was a hokey name, but at least it was a new approach to building web apps, built on the techniques and technology that preceded it. Web 3 is ... not that.

How is web3 not a new approach to building web apps?

You might disagree with the approach, but using blockchain as the backend for an app is very different from previous iterations of the web.

There have been plenty of new backend approaches since the term Web 2.0 was minted. The important change was a shifting from one request per view to multiple requests that comprise a view: it was the client/server interaction patterns that were important.

The fact that you build your “web 3” application using Web 2.0 techniques (SPAs, etc) tells me that web 3 is not a thing. It’s another type of backend, and the web is designed to have those appear in perpetuity.

So if you specifically craft a definition to exclude web3 from being a new paradigm for the web, it (surprisingly) is not a new paradigm for the web.

Interesting and constructive.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com