I can't respond to all of your points right now but I am interested in your comments about the blockchain. As a developer in the crypto space, I'm surprised that you're apparently not aware that reputation doesn't need to be tied to stake in order to exist. But even more surprising is that you're making an argument that people with money can abuse the reputation system, when the very reason that it is tied to stake is to make it prohibitively expensive to abuse that sort of thing. Decentralized tribunal systems are in the works (I designed one myself in 2011), to further make the network more resistant to such things.
Regarding your comment about blockchains and query load, you also seem to be unaware as a developer that blockchains are a source of truth, not a front-end. A user request does not cause a query to the blockchain. A network of server nodes can exist, with cached results. The servers themselves can have their own reputation system, or the entire front-end experience can be managed by a single centralized entity without compromising the use-case of decentralization. Specifically, if the owners of the front-end were to act in bad faith, it would be much, much less expensive for someone else to spin up another identical front-end (most likely open-source as there would be a lot of early criticism if it wasn't).
Regarding expenses and costs, solving that problem is part of the hard work. If I were building the system, I would probably not start out with the entire Internet being the scope. Perhaps as a proof of concept I'd start with Wikipedia only. I know for sure that paying for each search query is a non-starter, as that has a psychological effect of being punished for using the service, when you want it to feel rewarding instead.
Right. Sure, you could cache it. I will give you that. But you have to index the entire internet for it to be interesting to anyone. The first Google did that. It indexed most of the pages out there.
Why? Because the instant I search once, twice, three times and find nothing. I am abandoning the system.
Blockchain aside, it doesn't matter. Whatever system you build has to be 10x better than the current system. Nothing you have said, blockchain usage included, comes close to getting there.
Nothing I have said comes close to being 10x better because I have not posted any design specs, proposals, or pitches for such a system. I certainly can't beat Google by 10x with some offhanded comments which were not the point of the original post. But some of the misinformation you are spreading about blockchain technologies contributes to the negative sentiment seen around here, and it had to be addressed.
To me your posts come off as the hand-wavy "just sprinkle in some blockchain magic!" sentiment that is the main cause of blockchain eye-rolling on HN, not the person putting you in the position of elaboration.
Mr. Gupta asked, in a respectable and direct manner, for me to elaborate. And I did. You, and many of the posters here, did not ask nicely. So I did not.
Regarding your comment about blockchains and query load, you also seem to be unaware as a developer that blockchains are a source of truth, not a front-end. A user request does not cause a query to the blockchain. A network of server nodes can exist, with cached results. The servers themselves can have their own reputation system, or the entire front-end experience can be managed by a single centralized entity without compromising the use-case of decentralization. Specifically, if the owners of the front-end were to act in bad faith, it would be much, much less expensive for someone else to spin up another identical front-end (most likely open-source as there would be a lot of early criticism if it wasn't).
Regarding expenses and costs, solving that problem is part of the hard work. If I were building the system, I would probably not start out with the entire Internet being the scope. Perhaps as a proof of concept I'd start with Wikipedia only. I know for sure that paying for each search query is a non-starter, as that has a psychological effect of being punished for using the service, when you want it to feel rewarding instead.