I think this decentralization and federation is what web3 is all about, without all the corporations calling everything to do with monkey pixel art that costs a million dollars “web3”
The web3 that can be named is not the true web3, or something like that.
The “branded” Web3 was about “how do we create the third Web BUBBLE” more than “how do we create the third Web experience.” The people who missed buying AOL shares in 1996 or Amazon in 2002 wanted their chance to get in on speculation, except without the utility of an actual service or product underneath the hype.
Web 1.0, users form communities on bulletin boards, internet forums and newsgroups. It’s the birth of Web 2.0, investors and advertisers see potential in large user bases. This leads to social media and mobile apps as fronts for tracking users and big data collection. Smart home and wearables become a plot to bring tracking hardware into your life even when you aren’t actively engaging on the internet. The tech billionaire is born at the cost of the privacy and wallet of the user. Web 3.0, a federated Web 1.0 where users take back control of the internet. Tech billionaires live in homeless shelters and eat ramen noodles.
I like the overall trend towards ownership and non-centralized tools implicit in web3. If everything happening on the internet is owned by wall street, then it’s not going to act like the real internet.
If there’s a crypto aspect that has uses beyond grift, I’m open to it. There are certain ways it could be used to disintermediate owners and creators. I’m not sure if that’s happening yet. Ownership rights with digital content do leave a lot to be desired.
I hope we soon see the end of the “gold rush” era in crypto and start seeing actual cool stuff being done with it. Especially since legacy banking will simply co-opt it sooner or later.
BLOCKCHAIN is stupid and that’s the end of it. Legacy banking will never ever switch to a stupid, inefficient and ineffective system over whatever they have now that does millions of transactions per minute with a small energy footprint.
I gotta admit though, this has to be one of the first reasonable use cases for blockchain technology that I can think of - a P2P database for social forums… decentralised, but a single “instance” no matter how you access it. I imagine the blockchain sizes would get ridiculously large though, and all sorts of moderation issues. Probably not feasible, though I’m sure there’s a project on GitHub I’m not aware of…
If you were to host the entire forum on a blockchain, every node would have to hold the blockchain. So not scaling horizontally, but instead copying the “database” a bunch of times. Think of hosting all of the data in reddit on a thousand nodes. Sure you could access it from any node, but the database would be just as big as before, just copied around a bunch of times.
In a way this thing is already much more decentralized than a blockchain could ever be, in that every server doesn’t hold all of the data at once. Much better use of resources IMO.
The crypto side of web3 definitely felt way more “consumerist minded” with the way wallets were able to connect to multiple websites(exchanges) in order to “buy” things(alt/shitcoins). But federated social media feels like a much better use of decentralization so far.
Hah, web 2.0 was all about the explosion of user-generated content. Corps and cryptonerds wanted to make web 3.0 about making money, but the web has always been about the content, not its monetization. In trying to monetize the content, they’re alienating people and forcing them off the platforms they defaulted to.
Humans like to create and share content, no matter how easy or difficult it is to monetize. If the people who want to monetize humanity’s collective output make it harder to create, then hopefully the result is that people move off the ad-supported platforms and replace them with something that doesn’t rely on centralization with lots of capital to stay afloat.
If nothing else, the way that youtube has made it impossible for segments of the creative community to monetize their content and forced them rely on platforms such as patreon has made it more and more clear that ad-generated revenue is a dead end. You can’t force people to view advertising unless you hold their content hostage, and for the first time in history, they can’t buy out the means of production.
Add comment