in which each individual can contribute by plugin per computer to the
network of nodes.
blockchains,
linked data,
or the emergence of the collective realization that we should own our data
after all, after 50 years of lobbying from open source enthusiasts and
idealists like me (self service bias). Realization apparently triggered by the
blockchain proof of concept.
In the blockchain, the web3 mindset is in the fact that everyone can plug per
comptuter in the ecosystem to contribute to a system in which rules is written
in the code.
Also, some people try to link this to the earlier semantic web. People also
forget that the technology won’t magically put the GAFAM out of the equation
(see this discussion). It is often presented like a ideal stuff.
Also, while web is about http based stuff, the mains actors of web3
(blockchains, ipfs) etc are not built on http, hence web3 is definitely a shitty
name. It is a domino definition.
http + static data = web1
web1 + write access = web2
web2 + control - http = web3 ?
Eventually, web3 would have been what our future selves will retrospectively
have defined as web3.
the web 3.0 movement so well three is an
inclusive set of protocols to provide building blocks for application makers
these building blocks present a whole new way of creating applications things
different from from the from the way that technologies are built today these
technologies give users strong and verifiable guarantees about the information
they’re receiving what information they are giving away and what they are paying
and what they are receiving in return and this is I think one of my favorite
lines consider web 3 to be an executable magna carta the foundation of the
freedom of the individual against the arbitrary authority of the despot
lot of the link data web ended up getting sucked into the major data monopolies
so it turns out that you know the most successful linked data systems ended up
powering the knowledge graph and the Facebook Open Graph and not really the
amazing decentralized vision that Tim and that in hundreds of other people were
working on
if we squint at it web 1.0 was about linking content together across the
internet all static stuff web 2.0 was about linking programs to that content and
building rich dynamic applications across their devices and what’s going on now
is that the relationship is getting inverted we’re linking content and programs
directly to each other bypassing intermediary organizations removing
intermediaries and gaining public verifiability so what 3.0 is turning
centralized apps into decentralized protocols
the relationship is getting inverted we’re linking
content and programs directly to each other bypassing intermediary organizations
removing intermediaries and gaining public verifiability so what 3.0 is turning
centralized apps into decentralized protocols
it enables fully autonomous
applications things that will run whether or not you’re there to run them in the
future that’s a very important property that no system in the past had all
systems in the past had to be maintained by some organization by some group of
people that cared about continuing to run this thing now you know how can that
be how is it possible well very strong economic incentives
Bitcoin kind of kicked open the peer-to-peer world
again it thawed the peer-to-peer winter and they reminded everybody that we
could build peer-to-peer decentralized systems
peer-to-peer couldn’t compete with centralized systems peer
to peer couldn’t afford to pay people 24/7 to maintain infrastructure or to
scale the infrastructure as needs arose but the economic models of blockchains
enable you to do that and that’s extremely powerful
the amazing thing about this whole smart contract system is that it’s the basis
of a jurisdiction it’s a proto jurisdiction its computable law and it’s native
to the Internet so extremely extremely powerful thing and I don’t think we’re
even gonna tap the potential of that for many years to come
web 3 include trustless infrastructure things that you can use and trust without
worrying that they might turn against you removing intermediaries so not having
to trust the some party it’s not going to become a rent rent secure in the
future and giving users power and ownership over their data identity security
and transactions
Tim and the entire link data semantic web world has a lot of the same goals it’s
just that technology was different and the technology didn’t account for a lot
of the things that we know how to account for and so there is some important
unification here that could happen nothing that it will nothing that it ought to
but it could happen and there’s a lot of people that care but the very same
things that we care about just in very different ways and so I think that the
centralized web movement and the blockchain movement and the link data movement
are part of web 3 and web 3 is support should ought to support these three
movements in their own their own goals the end of the day what is more linked
than a blockchain really isn’t like the best definition of you know structured
linked data that isn’t gonna go away ever isn’t that kind of fulfilling the
vision of the link data world better than than a lot of the linked data systems
out there so I hope that in the future we have a digital system and that takes
into account our rights that takes into account how people use those systems and
how potential problems might be created
build a great web 3 help builds secure systems think ahead about the things
you’re building and make sure you don’t build something you’re gonna regret
there’s a lot of people right now that really regret what they did with web 2 so
make sure you don’t do that and build a bright future
I hope that we have a trustless decentralized infrastructure that we can just
use that we don’t have to worry that it’s manipulating us that we don’t have to
worry is a massive vector for propaganda that we don’t have to worry might own
us in the future or might stop existing how many services have you used that
just disappeared so I want to build a permanent and stable feature with all of
this tech and I think a lot of the people here do and to get there it’s gonna
require a lot of cooperation and interoperability and building sane protocols
going back to you know if you think back to that slide with a ton of different
protocols there’s probably a lot of people there they’re replicating work that
are doing the same thing over and over again and while competition can be useful
sometimes spreading too thin we’ll just cause the movement to fail remember that
these things take time if we go back to that hypertext thing you know we don’t
want we don’t want to be like one of the first avenues here right like we want
to be we want to be the last last line who’s gonna take a lot of cooperation and
a lot of interrupts so I think take this as a challenge to think through the
protocols and applications of your building and think about other parties and
other groups that are building similar things and consider working with them and
bringing them to some sort of shared ground build a standard with a shared
protocol build a shared system
Web2 fait référence à la version d’Internet que la plupart d’entre nous
connaissent aujourd’hui. Un Internet dominé par les sociétés qui fournissent des
services en échange de vos données personnelles. Dans le contexte d’Ethereum,
Web3 fait référence aux applications décentralisées qui s’exécutent sur la
blockchain. Ce sont des applications qui permettent à quiconque de participer
sans monétiser ses données personnelles
Quiconque sur le réseau a l’autorisation d’utiliser le service. En d’autres
termes, aucune autorisation n’est requise.Personne ne peut vous bloquer ni vous
refuser l’accès au service.Les paiements sont intégrés via le jeton natif,
l’ether (ETH).Ethereum est “Turing-complet”, ce qui signifie que vous pouvez
programmer à peu près tout ce que vous voulez.
Web2Web3Twitter peut censurer n’importe quel compte ou tweet.Les tweets Web3 ne pourraient pas être censurés, car le contrôle est décentralisé.Un service de paiement peut décider de ne pas autoriser les paiements pour certains types de travaux.Les applications de paiement Web3 ne requièrent aucune donnée personnelle et ne peuvent pas empêcher les paiements.Les serveurs des applications de travail à la tâche (ou gig-économie) pourraient fermer et affecter les revenus des travailleurs.Les serveurs Web3 ne peuvent pas fermer. Ils utilisent Ethereum, un réseau décentralisé de milliers d’ordinateurs, comme backend
Web3 a actuellement quelques limitations :Évolutivité : Les transactions sont plus lentes sur le Web3 car elles sont décentralisées. Les changements d’état, comme un paiement, doivent être traités par un mineur et propagés sur le réseau.UX : Interagir avec les applications Web3 peut nécessiter des étapes, des logiciels et des connaissances supplémentaires. Cela peut constituer un obstacle à son adoption.Coût : La plupart des DApps réussies publient de très petites portions de leur code sur la blockchain car c’est coûteux
en réalité, le degré de centralisation ou de décentralisation d’un réseau repose
sur un spectre. Aucun réseau n’est entièrement centralisé ni entièrement
décentralisé
All centralized networks face threats to their stability and security. Web3 came about because Web2 is not able to offer the security and stability we need. Securing fragile apps on a fragile base is a nonstarter: That’s why engineers and developers are focused on building and strengthening Web3, and why Protocol Labs supports their efforts.
As a leader in Web3, Berty’s code is 100 percent open source. Anyone with the skills and mindset can build on or contribute to the codebase. No single person is ever in control. Instead, the integrity of Berty rests in the hands of its users
When you work with a bank […] the fact they have total control over this
situation is proved by the fact that they can change your password or change the
rules for your password on the fly.
With crypto security, you can remove the relationship with the intermediary and
have direct relationship with the protocol. […] it means that you can really
own the thing. […] no one can revoke or interfere with your relationship with
those tokens or those nfts, those assets, whatever.
How do people access facebook? […] They use a client that facebook controls
[…] that interface still does not control the underline information […]
you expand the space of people who can try their shot at an interface […] now
anyone can make an interface […] the interface on crypto based application
will end up being better because of this interoperaility
So cool about the web3 way […] single interface for everyone else to plug in
to as opposed to forcing everyone to recode their security system […] don’t run
your own crypto.
In web2, the client makes a request to the server and the server responds and gives back a response. Here in web3, there is something called nodes. So in order to talk to our smart contracts, we need to talk to these nodes. For that, we can use node providers like Alchemy, Infura etc… or set up your own node
Web 3.0 opens a new future where users and distributed machines can interact with data, value, and even other counterparties via peer-to-peer networks without the need for third parties
it could be web 2 based apis or web 3 or blockchain information and that
allows that information to flow into the decentralized oracle network and then
be placed on other blockchains and that data flow is is bi-directional
so from my point of
view one of the most important thing that is preventing web 3 and the general
adoption of the web 3 uh is actually a connection to a web 2 right so if you
would think of a modern applications that are on the on the smartphones for
example your banking application so when when it connects to the server when
you’re doing the banking transaction it actually establishes a secure connection
and what it means that there’s some kind of information that is digitally signed
on your device because your device has a digital it has a key and and your
device is able to calculate digital signatures right so uh doesn’t it feel very
very familiar to the web3 world when you have your own key and you’re signing
the stuff right the only difference is that web 2 users they’re not having meta
mask they’re not having some kind of other wallets right and uh but but they
have keys already every time when you see the green https it means that you have
a key and you are using this key so i think that this this piece actually using
the existing public key infrastructure that is already implemented in the real
world of web 2 and having enabling the shift of this public infrastructure to
the web3 world and allowing users to sign these transactions with their existing
keys but making blockchains or making something in the middle this middleware
piece and is actually going to transform this messages that are signed transform
it into the blockchain transactions and making sure that users are owning their
data they are owning their um you know value um this is a thing that is a little
bit missing at the moment and in case this thing is going to be implemented it’s
going to be you know a massive boom for the web 3 um and uh just a ginormous
expansion of the web 3 into the web 2 world
Web 1.0 refers roughly to the period from 1991 to 2004, where most websites were
static webpages, and the vast majority of users were consumers, not producers,
of content.[13][14] Web 2.0 is based around the idea of “the web as
platform”[15] and centers on user-created content uploaded to social media and
networking services, blogs, and wikis, among other services
Web3 is distinct from Tim Berners-Lee’s 1999 concept for a semantic web.[18] In
2006, Berners-Lee described the semantic web as a component of Web 3.0, which is
different than the term Web3 in crypto context.[19]
Web 1.0, the story goes, was the era of decentralized, open protocols, in which
most online activity involved navigating to individual static webpages. Web 2.0,
which we’re living through now, is the era of centralization, in which a huge
share of communication and commerce takes place on closed platforms owned by a
handful of super-powerful corporations—think Google, Facebook, Amazon—subject to
the nominal control of centralized government regulators. Web3 is supposed to
break the world free of that monopolistic control.
Platforms and apps built on Web3 won’t be owned by a central gatekeeper, but
rather by users, who will earn their ownership stake by helping to develop and
maintain those services.
particular meaning of trust that’s essentially faith. It’s the belief that
something will happen, that the world will work in a certain way, without any
real evidence or rational arguments as to why it will do that. So we want less
of that, and we want more truth—which what I really mean is a greater reason to
believe that our expectations will be met
Trust implies that you are you’re placing some sort of authority in somebody
else, or in some organization, and they will be able to use this authority in
some arbitrary way.
As soon as it becomes credible trust, it’s not really trust anymore. There is a
mechanism, a rationale, an argument, a logical mechanism—whatever— but in my
mind, it’s not trust.
what if WhatsApp introduced into their service a key that allowed them to
decrypt all conversations? How do we know that it’s not there? You have to
trust.
is it really peer-to-peer or is it actually run from one data center by a
company that manufactures and sells hardware and is required to be consulted
before a new node can come online? The details make the difference as to whether
it’s basically just Web 2.0 in disguise or whether it is actually legitimately
open, transparent, decentralized, peer-to-peer
hard to imagine anyone outside of a small subset of people with high technical
literacy actually exercising that right to participate in providing the
service. And in that scenario, it sounds like you would have a different kind of
centralization. Perhaps it would be more than just, you know, a handful of
all-powerful CEOs, but it would still be a small subset of people for whom
that’s a meaningful freedom.
big difference between having a right or a freedom that you could execute if you
had bothered educating yourself well enough, and the inability at a very basic
and fundamental level of doing something because you lack the inclusion in an
exclusive group.
wonder if that’s sort of a naive—forgive me—reading of social arrangements to
think that everybody just kind of has the choice to go become an expert Web3
programmer?
I’m not going to try and persuade you that literally every person in the world
could do this. But the point is that the more people that can do this, the lower
the barrier, the better
Web3 brings that Web 2.0 cannot easily service is financial obligations or
economically strong applications. This is where individuals in a peer to peer
fashion can have economic services between themselves.
every technology that I can think of has served to make the user more
powerful. They can do more stuff. They can be richer, they can fulfill the
service that they provide faster or better or to more people.
Blockchain doesn’t do that. It’s fundamentally different. It’s effectively a
social construct. It’s a set of rules. And the only thing that these rules have
going for themselves is that there is no one with arbitrary power within the
system
who are the people who are in power and those power structures usually transfer no matter what things are looking like, like, no matter if we change the web, and a lot of times when we try to like solve these very human problems with technology, we end up just making the situation worse, and I don’t see any convincing evidence yet that that’s not going to be the case with Web 3.0, or all this stuff.
Web3 will help support the liberal, postwar order. How do you see it doing that?
[…]
Web3 is actually much more of a larger sociopolitical movement that is moving
away from arbitrary authorities into a much more rationally based liberal model
Web 3.0’s data is distributed and stored at peripheral devices connected to the network, rather than creating a giant server controlled by any technology corporation
Web 2.0 is the web generation that most people are using today, where users can easily interact with the content on the website. It means that we can leave messages, comments, and chat right at the content we are reaching. This evolution has made communication on the Internet more straightforward than ever
data will be decentralized, which is a significant improvement over the present generation of the internet (Web 2.0), in which data is mostly held in centralized repositories
Web 3.0 is the next stage of the web evolution that would make the internet more intelligent or process information with near-human-like intelligence through the power of AI systems that could run smart programs to assist users
Web 3.0 aims to create a decentralized and secured Internet, where the users can safely and securely exchange information and money, without the need for any middlemen or Big Tech companies
For instance, if you were to host a blog the old-fashioned way, you would put up a server and publish to the Internet. Nowadays, your blog would be hosted on a platform like WordPress, Ghost, Notion, or even Twitter. If these companies were to have an outage, this affects a lot more people. In a distributed fashion, via IPFS for instance, your blog content can be hosted and served from multiple locations operated by different entities.
Web 3.0 simply takes this a step further by making the internet accessible to everyone anywhere, at any time. At some point, internet-connected devices will no longer be concentrated on computers and smartphones like in Web 2.0 since IoT (Internet of Things) technology will bring forth a plethora of new types of smart devices.
web3 applications either run on blockchains, decentralized networks of many peer to peer nodes (servers), or a combination of the two that forms a cryptoeconomic protocol. These apps are often referred to as dapps (decentralized apps), and you will see that term used often in the web3 space
cryptocurrency is often part of the conversation. This is because cryptocurrency plays a big role in many of these protocols. It provides a financial incentive (tokens) for anyone who wants to participate in creating, governing, contributing to, or improving one of the projects themselves.
Consumers of the service usually pay to use the protocol, similarly to how they would pay a cloud provider like AWS today. Except in web3, the money goes directly to the network participants.
Comme l’accès à l’information en ligne du Web 1.0, puis l’interactivité du Web 2.0, la décentralisation au cœur du Web 3.0 peut changer radicalement notre façon de vivre l’Internet et, plus largement, notre économie. Se dressant face aux GAFAM, cette nouvelle itération du Web pourrait être une révolution
Mais y sommes-nous seulement prêts ?
Pas certain, lorsque l’on constate que, ni les Facebook Papers, ni l’annonce tonitruante de Facebook sur le Métavers, n’a eu d’effet notable sur la recherche « Facebook » dans Google.
Le pic de recherche du 4 octobre ? C’était le jour où Facebook était… en panne
Sans trop s’avancer, on peut également dire que les clés de la compréhension du Web 3.0 résident dans les concepts de décentralisation et de transfert de valeur. C’est en tout cas l’objectif poursuivi par ses défenseurs : associer leurs efforts aux innovations technologiques pour réduire l’hégémonie des GAFAM sur notre vie numérique.
1989, Tim Berners-Lee avait imaginé Internet comme une plateforme ouverte. La mission que se donne le Web 3.0 est de réaliser cette vision d’un Internet plus ouvert, grâce à la décentralisation.
redonner le pouvoir aux utilisateurs, de leur permettre de capter leur propre valeur en ligne, alors qu’aujourd’hui cette valeur est captée par les plateformes
Pour attaquer un protocole Web 3.0, il faudrait attaquer, en même temps, tous les ordinateurs qui composent le réseau. C’est quasiment impossible. Si un ou plusieurs nœuds du réseau est attaqué, les autres nœuds continuent de fonctionner normalement
Liberté : une publication sur le Web 3.0 est inaltérable. Personne ne peut la retirer. Dans le Web 2.0, chaque plateforme peut bannir un utilisateur ou censurer un contenu comme il l’entend. Nuançons tout de même, car la liberté octroyée par le web 3.0 pose de nombreuses questions sur le plan éthique. Dès lors, comment lutter contre les discriminations ou la haine en ligne ?
révolution du Web 3.0 réside ni dans les technologies qu’il utilise, ni dans les fonctionnements qu’il adopte. Ce ne sont là que des moyens. En réalité, la révolution réside dans la distribution de la valeur. Cette valeur qui, en s’affranchissant des intermédiaires, passe directement des créateurs aux utilisateurs. C’est le circuit-court appliqué au Web.
liberté absolue et l’anonymat peuvent également faire craindre nombre de dérives – des propos extrémistes aux transactions illégales en passant par le blanchiment d’argent sale.
Web3 est l’internet de troisième génération, basé sur les nouvelles technologies comme la Blockchain et le métavers. Son principal avantage est la décentralisation, à l’inverse du web actuel dominé par les GAFAM
L’avantage du Web3 serait sa décentralisation. Plutôt que d’accéder à internet via les services de géants comme Apple, Google ou Facebook, les individus pourraient contrôler et posséder eux-mêmes la toile.
confidentialité des internautes serait mieux protégée, car ces intermédiaires et les autorités sont à la source d’une majeure partie de la collection des données.
plusieurs grandes entreprises et investisseurs placent déjà de larges sommes dans le Web3. On peut donc craindre une forme de pouvoir centralisé régnant malgré tout sur cette nouvelle version d’internet
sceptiques estiment que les promesses du Web3 comme l’architecture distribuée et la décentralisation seront plus simples à atteindre sans la blockchain.
selon Ten Oever, « si vous créez une architecture distribuée sur une infrastructure centralisée, vous ne décentralisez pas soudainement l’infrastructure « . Ainsi, même si l’infrastructure est théoriquement décentralisée, en pratique, la plupart de l’internet repose toujours sur des serveurs hébergés par une poignée d’entreprises comme Amazon.
Wood wrote in a blog post that the Web should move toward a “zero-trust interaction system [where] all interactions will be carried out pseudonymously, securely and for many services, trustlessly.”
Bad faith. Aws and others allow pretty good recundency against outage
Many activities that make blockchain-based activity on the web possible depend on a handful of private, centralized companies. “So much work, energy, and time has gone into creating a trustless distributed consensus mechanism,” Marlinspike wrote, “but virtually all clients that wish to access it do so by simply trusting the outputs from these two companies without any further verification.”
The market has already consolidated around two providers, Alechemy and Infura, that power the bulk of dApps on Ethereum, the most popular blockchain for software developers. Instead of trusting Ethereum, in other words, one has to trust Infura or Alchemy
ut that’s not the only way the crypto industry is consolidated. Crypto exchanges, where users can buy and sell currencies like Bitcoin and Ether, are dominated by Binance, which handles about three times as much trading volume as the next most popular exchange. MetaMask, owned by Infura parent company Consensys, has also become the dominant crypto wallet for Ethereum—that’s where you can store the NFTs you’ve bought. And OpenSea essentially controls the NFT market, processing 84% of the $2.7 billion spent on peer-to-peer NFT transactions in December 2021
Ethereum co-founder Vitalik Buterin acknowledged many of Marlinspike’s critiques. But he predicted that the future will be different. “It’s easier to build things the lazy centralized way, and it takes serious effort to ‘do it right,’” he said. In the future, Buterin said, It will become easier and cheaper for companies and users to run programs directly on the Ethereum blockchain, even if users gravitate toward easy-to-use centralized options.
websites and apps will be able to process information in a smart human-like way through technologies like machine learning (ML), Big Data, decentralized ledger technology (DLT), etc.
originally called the semantic web by World Wide Web inventor Tim Berners-Lee, and was aimed at being a more autonomous, intelligent, and open internet.
make the internet more intelligent or process information with near-human-like intelligence through the power of AI systems that could run smart programs to assist users
When you are not a white man, when you are straight, when you are the gender
that you were assigned at birth, you kind of have a good time on the internet,
generally. You live in a different world than the rest of us do.
if you look at any web framework, authors, unfortunately, you don’t see a lot of diversity there. It’s possible for anybody to contribute to open source, to contribute on StackOverflow, and things like that. But I know, for example, on Stack Overflow, a grand majority, maybe not a majority, a large number of people that I know, have fake names on Stack Overflow, because they want to hide the fact that they’re a woman.
And that’s why I always point to when I’m talking about like, the decentralized technology as a whole. I always point to AI and machine learning, because we thought, as humans are the biased ones, let’s let the computers make the decisions. And there will be no bias, everything will be perfect. But we keep seeing time and time again how this is just not true. Because if humans are building the technology, it’s inherently going to be carrying the bias of those humans who are building it.
But I can say, I think we had a similar enthusiasm and attitude toward AI and machine learning, thinking that this was a technology that could solve human problems that were like systemic, and just huge issues. And, like, let’s use AI, like, you know, solve the whole bias thing and all that kind of stuff. And it just ended up making the problem worse. And I feel like we might be doing the same thing with these decentralized technologies, right?
So I also admittedly don’t know a lot. But here’s how I’ve made some sense of it. And so it’s called Web 3.0, because there’s Web 2.0 and Web 1.0. The first, quote unquote, iteration of the Web was basically the read-only web where it was people just kind of putting up websites, probably mostly academics, because that’s what the web was first made for, being able to share documents and research and stuff. And then Web 2.0 is what pretty much everybody knows of today, where it’s kind of like, the interactive web where you you can actually use it, interact with it, chat on it, it’s very social, and stuff. And when you think about Web 2.0 and its flaws, you kind of think about, basically security and monetization
where it’s not like these big companies owning your data and stuff. You’re supposed to own your data, because it’s on the blockchain and decentralized and stuff, payments are built in so you don’t have to think about that kind of monetization aspect of your data being sold. And it’s robust in a way because it’s on the blockchain. It’s not relying on a company somewhere and their data to keep your information active
We’re talking about like totally redoing how the web works. Because of that, I think when people get on Twitter, or when they write these articles, or even when they start companies, preaching like this decentralized utopia, I think we deserve to add some realism into the mix. Because like with Web 2.0, right, I’m sure when that first came out, everybody thought it was going to be amazing, this was going to be great. And look what like the problems that we created are like huge and have had huge impacts on like, people like in general. And I don’t think that Web 3.0 is going to be any different. I don’t think that—like I hear decentralized and I hear like your identity, you’re like anonymous
in a country who were dispossessed, or under a dictatorship, can now use social media to organize. And this is like a new dawn for democracy, and citizens rights and citizens ability to organize. And now we’re a decade later, and people’s view of social media is the complete opposite. Like it’s destroying democracy, and it’s all feeding us disinformation, it’s making us all hate each other. So in that brief span of time, relatively speaking, it went from being this savior to this villain. And that I think often happens, because power becomes centralized in a certain area, and people are putting profit above other interests.
a lot of people are into like the crypto, the NFTs not because they think this is something that unbanked people are going to be able to use, and it’s going to change the world for the better. They’re into it for profit. And I think we should just leave with that. Like, if you’re gonna tell me that you’re into NFTs and you’re into crypto because it makes you money, fine. Like, that’s totally fine. But to preach this like savior mentality of like, “I want to change the world. And I want to make it a better place through like decentralized finances” or whatever. That’s usually like—you just mentioned Coinbase earlier, that’s usually not how it really pans out. Like, if you’re into it for the profit, fine.
think about the people who are disadvantaged in the world, and the categories of
people who are more prone to harassment on the internet, and stuff. And
unfortunately, they’re bad actors everywhere. And when I hear anonymous, I hear
people getting away with stuff. And unfortunately, that’s very cynical, but
that’s what I see
Not your wallet, not your money. In a traditional bank, you don’t really own the
money the banks says you have. Paying the guys that make the network is the cost
of owning your own money. Hence, the price of the freedom promised by the web3
is the cost of the maintenance of the machines that compose the decentralized
system.
To put fiat money in the blockchain, you still need to use some centralized
system (exchange) that knows where you live. For example, in Nouvelle
Calédonie, you cannot create an ethereum account using traditional exchanges.
web3 is the web of the IoT, of the connected devices etc. But those won’t be
able to run a whole DHT of blockchain node. Hence they need to rely on some
third party (centralization).
There are plenty of usages for which web3 is strange. When buying things, the
seller knows what you bought, so there is no need to decentralize or make
this anonymous.
Most web3 technologies (ipfs, blockchain) are not even web (as in
based on http) technologies.
Web3 might be sufficiently decentralized.
web1 was the web of documents. Now, we want a web of people and documents.
In the past, we already could setup some keys and discuss with
identity, trust and security in mind. People did not appear like they cared and
willingly gave the powers to the nice looking interfaces of facebook, google
etc. As long as the GAFAM have the manpower to make shiny interfaces, I don’t
see how people would not want to give them the power.
To me, the supposedly new web3 mindset as been there since the beginning of
computers, as well as intermediaries building a business in dealing with your
data and people gladly using their solution as long as it fulfilled their needs
with a comfortable interface.
I have always been against using tools that did not met me own my data. This
lead me directly to open source thinking. A lot of projects like woob have
showed that we have learned to live in a world where intrusive intermediaries
deal with our data, without accepting it.
Hence, I agree with the idea that while this is an exiting era in terms of
technologies, the anti-web3 mindset is more of a human stuff that, no matter the
fancy technology you use, won’t go, unless we collectively decide to. Also, if
we would have wanted to have a web3 mindset, neither web1 or web2 did prevent
it.
It looks like those web3 convinced guys still use centralized tools like
facebook, google, youtube instead of their “more decentralized” counterparts.
