<instructions>Your goal is to analyze the following comment and estimate how highly it will be upvoted by the Hacker News community.</instructions><comment><author>cormacrelf</author><text>Yeah, but remember when Facebook decided to inflate engagement stats for video, and sent everyone on a wild goose chase trying to create videos for everything? That made journalism much more expensive to do, made the web worse (auto playing videos now everywhere) and was a complete and utter waste of everyone’s time, effort and money. That’s almost certainly happening again with the metaverse. You don’t have to play the game. You’re arguing that we should follow the advice of large institutions to invest in their crap, simply because if we don’t, they’ll have the crap all to themselves. I say let them keep it.</text><parent_chain><item><author>ayngg</author><text>I think the idea is that there are entities like facebook&amp;#x2F; meta who believe that the metaverse is going to be a big thing, so if a &amp;quot;metaverse&amp;quot; is going to exist and see adoption, most people would much rather have it not be under the sole control of a corporation like facebook like most of the services on the web right now. Similarly, digital currencies are going to eventually become mainstream, and there are similar concerns about how central banks will implement them. In cases like these, having an second option that isn&amp;#x27;t controlled by some powerful institution could help democratize how they get implemented and used. If you dismiss it, then you are just leaving it to these large institutions to make the rules like they previously have, they have the power and resources to out compete, buy or snuff out any traditional competition.</text></item><item><author>egeozcan</author><text>&amp;gt; if your only answer is dismissal and anger, you’re actually just ceding the power to decide what these technologies will look like in our world&lt;p&gt;I mean, if I&amp;#x27;m dismissing it, it means that I don&amp;#x27;t believe that anything meaningful could come out of it, doesn&amp;#x27;t it? At that point, why &amp;quot;power to decide what these technologies will look like in our world&amp;quot; should have any role in my decision process?&lt;p&gt;&amp;gt; these technologies are not going to go away&lt;p&gt;There are a lot of harmful, useless, irrelevant, etc. technologies which won&amp;#x27;t go away. So this wouldn&amp;#x27;t be surprising. But if someone is trying to articulate that these technologies will create a revolution of some sorts, most people will need better convincing.&lt;p&gt;Show me the value, where&amp;#x27;s the ??? value!</text></item></parent_chain></comment><story><title>On Web3 Infrastructure</title><url>https://mirror.xyz/suzuha.eth/vb5E5lhzmPTcpxOJcz6Q211TDgSvoFwDLA6JSM1V37Q</url></story>
<instructions>Your goal is to analyze the following comment and estimate how highly it will be upvoted by the Hacker News community.</instructions><comment><author>grumpyprole</author><text>&amp;gt; could help democratize how they get implemented&lt;p&gt;Was there any democratic process when &amp;quot;Solidity&amp;quot; was designed? Unfortunately, it does not appear to me that the right experts have been involved and that there was peer review. It looks like it was thrown over a wall, much like JavaScript was.</text><parent_chain><item><author>ayngg</author><text>I think the idea is that there are entities like facebook&amp;#x2F; meta who believe that the metaverse is going to be a big thing, so if a &amp;quot;metaverse&amp;quot; is going to exist and see adoption, most people would much rather have it not be under the sole control of a corporation like facebook like most of the services on the web right now. Similarly, digital currencies are going to eventually become mainstream, and there are similar concerns about how central banks will implement them. In cases like these, having an second option that isn&amp;#x27;t controlled by some powerful institution could help democratize how they get implemented and used. If you dismiss it, then you are just leaving it to these large institutions to make the rules like they previously have, they have the power and resources to out compete, buy or snuff out any traditional competition.</text></item><item><author>egeozcan</author><text>&amp;gt; if your only answer is dismissal and anger, you’re actually just ceding the power to decide what these technologies will look like in our world&lt;p&gt;I mean, if I&amp;#x27;m dismissing it, it means that I don&amp;#x27;t believe that anything meaningful could come out of it, doesn&amp;#x27;t it? At that point, why &amp;quot;power to decide what these technologies will look like in our world&amp;quot; should have any role in my decision process?&lt;p&gt;&amp;gt; these technologies are not going to go away&lt;p&gt;There are a lot of harmful, useless, irrelevant, etc. technologies which won&amp;#x27;t go away. So this wouldn&amp;#x27;t be surprising. But if someone is trying to articulate that these technologies will create a revolution of some sorts, most people will need better convincing.&lt;p&gt;Show me the value, where&amp;#x27;s the ??? value!</text></item></parent_chain></comment><story><title>On Web3 Infrastructure</title><url>https://mirror.xyz/suzuha.eth/vb5E5lhzmPTcpxOJcz6Q211TDgSvoFwDLA6JSM1V37Q</url></story>