My First Impressions of Web3
&gt;When you think about it, OpenSea would actually be much “better” in the immediate sense if all the web3 parts were gone. It would be faster, cheaper for everyone, and easier to use.<p>That sums up the situation for me. Having a marketplace for purely digital goods <i>might</i> be a concept with a future. Having standard ways to interoperate between different platforms and query and update these goods <i>might</i> make sense (although I still think it goes opposite to the general trend of walled gardens vs. decentralized web, I don&#x27;t see why the IP owners would play ball and accept the loss of control).<p>The thing is that in most case those NFTs wouldn&#x27;t be trustless. I see people putting forward that a use case would be an NFT that proves that your Rolex is real, or for Fortnite skins, or for the ownership of your house. But in all these situations, there&#x27;s a very clear authority (Rolex, Epic Games and the municipal authorities, respectively). These authorities will be allowed to mint new NFTs at will (because who else?) and as such have to be trusted. That opens up interesting questions btw, like &quot;who is Rolex exactly?&quot; which creates a chain of custody of trusted authority involving trademark management among other things. But I digress.<p>But then as soon as an authority is identified, why bother with the extreme overhead (it terms of resources and costs) of blockchain tech? Couldn&#x27;t Rolex issue a PGP signed CSV of all valid Rolex serial numbers once a month on IPFS and you&#x27;d get the exact same security and trust profile without having to involve any &quot;web3&quot; feature?<p>Like cryptocurrencies, the subset of problems that can only be solved using NFTs is incredibly tiny and speculators rush to make up use cases that, if you think about it for five minutes, clearly make no sense and could be better solved using good old centralized tech.