Hacker News Reader

Comment by engmgrmgr | Hacker News Reader

That’s a rather myopic view.

You could look at L2s as a sort of credit card system, and from a systems and technology POV there’s nothing inherently “scammy” about it. For web3 applications of any meaningful large scale, L2 solutions are necessary.

For better or worse, the L2 developer platforms that I assume you’re referring to are essentially low-code solutions to abstract away the actual systems software engineering aspect of web3 development. Are the low-code SaaS companies overvalued or “scammy”? I’m not suggesting they are or are not.

Well-staffed tech companies building web3 applications often build their own implicit L2 solutions because it’s just how you connect things in a distributed system with modern L1 blockchain constraints.

View on HN

I think the person you're responding to was talking about Bitcoin L2 chains, probably more specifically the lightning network.

I actually agree with that about Bitcoin.

Web3 is generally done on EVM or cosmos chains, some of which are L2s (and some of which are loosely considered L2s). But most of them are still separate chains, so not L2s in the sense that the Lightning network is an L2. If you're looking at EVM chains, then L2s are certainly required to handle significant throughput, but the "lack of transparency" mentioned by GP isn't an issue with them.

How is lightning “a ploy to enrich its creator”?

Especially considering that it is being independently developed by three organisations as an open source protocol that offers complete self-hosting and doesn't require an intermediary during operation...

Basically it leads to hubs forming where lightning nodes with large amounts of funds are better able to facilitate transactions, and also benefit from that due to transaction fees.

This is as clear and succinct a statement as to why "web3" has nothing to offer as I have read.

Translation: we will rebuild existing financial institutions with a bunch of move-fast break-things poorly-regulated "difi" companies which will both intentionally and through ignorance recapitulate every flaw of the existing financial industry.

Purpose: as in the Celsius case, to intentionally exploit regulatory response time so as to extract money through opaque extra-legal and unethical exploits, intended to allow ourselves and chosen insiders to run off it, leaving deluded last-fools holding the bag.

There is literally no benefit to anyone except the VC backing the scam, who are using chaff and FOMO to farm rubes.

I think this has been going on for at least 2000 years…

It doesn’t matter if it’s crypto or gold, there will always be people manipulating financial systems, but that doesn’t mean any system is inherently good or bad.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Financial_crisis_of_33

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Financial_crisis_of_2007%E2%...

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/WeWork

> Well-staffed tech companies building web3 applications often build their own implicit L2 solutions because it’s just how you connect things in a distributed system with modern L1 blockchain constraints.

Sure. The banks do the exact same thing, which is what makes them so goddamn profitable to run. The problem is that the entire cryptocurrency space now has to choose between two destinies:

a. Default on the trustless model in order to continue scaling, passing the actual verification process to private validators who may or may not be scamming you.

b. Let every token lose it's value, allow the system to suffocate and continue pushing for airtight security until the bitter end.

Now, neither of those are attractive choices. I'll tell you what, though: I'd rather have a $20 bill than $20,000 of Monopoly money.

> I'd rather have a $20 bill than $20,000 of Monopoly money

All currencies we use are smoke and mirrors. The difference is that that $20 bill is backed by well armed US Marines and an crypto currency is not

Can I sell the underlying Marines in the event I lose faith in the investment?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com