What is Web 3.0? Here’s a massively over simplified, 30-second primer

[SharmCity]

Web 1.0

• The first iteration of the world wide web was mostly static content… Websites were like online versions of magazines, newspapers, or encyclopedias.
• Information flowed one way. You could go to a website and read, listen to, or watch content, but not interact with it more than that.
• Open source. Nobody owned the ‘www platform’. Anyone could buy a domain and host content on it. Would that content reach anyone outside that tiny sandbox? … Good luck.
• Google seized the open-source power vacuum, winning the search engine war. They connected these individual silos of information (websites) and organized them together in a meaningful, user-friendly way. Their prize was de facto ownership of a technically ‘open source’ internet.

Web 2.0

• In 2004, we moved into the age of social media and user-generated content.
• Instead of static webpages that hold all of the information, you and your fellow users create and distribute content every time you post.
• You have the power to reach and interact with a vast network on platforms that are already built such as Facebook, Twitter, YouTube, etc..
• But you are a guest on these platforms. You own nothing and gain little to no value from your intellectual labor.
• Information flows both freely, ownership does not.
• You pay a price by giving up any rights to the EULA. Along with ‘losing’ the content of what you post, you give up much of your privacy and data behind the scenes.

Web 3.0

• The community and networking effect of the internet will reach new heights, but power will return to open-source and decentralized software.
• Blockchain, smart contracts and tokenization allow for individual ownership, in a way that was never possible.
• You will own your online identity in a very tangible way, rather than just being a guest on several ‘free’ platforms.
• The value you create will transfer with you anywhere you go. Your contribution and reputation will be as good as real money that can be exchanged for goods, services, or ownership.
• Software code will be 100% out in the open. Anyone can look under the hood and audit what any piece of software is doing behind the scenes.
• Software and apps will all fit together like Lego blocks and be compatible with each other. You won’t have a separate Apple ecosystem, Google ecosystem, etc. Instead, you will have your own individual identity that you can take anywhere.
• Whatever the next ‘Facebook’ is, it will not be owned by a company but by the community. As a user, you will own the content you create. You will also have a stake in the decisions made as a partial owner.
• You will own digital assets you buy (art, music, video game loot, etc…), they will have real value, you'll have the rights to resell them or alter them and you’ll be able to take them with you across platforms as part of your ‘virtual identity’
• Information, ownership, and value flows freely between users, their communities, and the assets they help build through participation.
• Instead of a centralized authority making the rules, it will be a community. There are downsides of this democratization of power. Jack Dorsey can’t de-platform you, but the mob still can.
• Some of the big players (Facebook, Apple) are fighting against this. Some countries (China) are fighting against this. Decentralization makes censorship difficult. It represents a huge loss on their grip of power. However, the technology will not be stopped in the long run. The genie is already out of the bottle.
• There are a million more applications of the blockchain that aren’t covered here – cryptocurrency, DeFi, NFTs, etc.. and the implications and use-cases of these technologies are endless.

 

Dislike ads? Remove them and support the forum: Subscribe to Fastlane Insiders.

[NewManRising]

Thank you for the summary.

 

[RussRussman18]

I think you massively overestimate:

1. The tech savviness of the average person
2. The concern of the average person for personal privacy, or opensource software ethics

Both of these things need to raise by orders of magnitude in gen pop for the things you posted to come to fruition. The driving force behind web 1.0 and 2.0 was always convenience and fast entertainment, never some kind of 'pioneering technological virtue'. I fail to see what will drive "Web 3.0"

 

[SharpeningBlade]

I think you massively overestimate:

1. The tech savviness of the average person
2. The concern of the average person for personal privacy, or opensource software ethics

Both of these things need to raise by orders of magnitude in gen pop for the things you posted to come to fruition. The driving force behind web 1.0 and 2.0 was always convenience and fast entertainment, never some kind of 'pioneering technological virtue'. I fail to see what will drive "Web 3.0"

It is sentiments like this which give me hope in Web3, that it is not actually the massive pump and dump scheme it appears to be at first glance.

Addressing point (1), you are right. Most people are not tech savvy. They want convenience. This argument mirrors the same argument made about the Internet back in the early 90s. No one knew what it was, no one saw that it could benefit them in any way. And yet, probably nearly everyone here at the forum who has made a decent amount of money has leveraged the internet in some way to do it. It's become an integral part of entrepreneurship. And yet, in the beginning of the Internet, it was not necessarily easy or user-friendly.

Addressing point (2), If you look at pew research, about half of Americans are pretty concerned with privacy over convenience. So thats almost 180 million people, quite a big market in the US. Also, yes web1 and web2 was all about convenience. Nevertheless, not all blockchains are private. Actually most are public so you can trace transactions to a person's public wallet. This is why criminal investigators love when crimes are committing using crypto since it's easier to trace than dollars.

Web3 is like a wild west. Almost all of it is experimental. Many projects will fail. Many failed projects could lead to success later on down the road. And a portion of the projects will attain success right out of the gate. But the fact that you fail to see what will drive Web3, is a great indicator to me, that we are still early in the game!

 

Dislike ads? Remove them and support the forum: Subscribe to Fastlane Insiders.

[Johnny boy]

lol internet communism

 

[SharpeningBlade]

lol internet communism

View attachment 41137

If the past 2 years show us anything, it's that web2 is internet communism. Web3 is more like the digital anarchic free market.

 

[RussRussman18]

Addressing point (1), you are right. Most people are not tech savvy. They want convenience. This argument mirrors the same argument made about the Internet back in the early 90s. No one knew what it was, no one saw that it could benefit them in any way. And yet, probably nearly everyone here at the forum who has made a decent amount of money has leveraged the internet in some way to do it. It's become an integral part of entrepreneurship. And yet, in the beginning of the Internet, it was not necessarily easy or user-friendly.

The internet and social media have only become so prolific because these massive tech companies have invested billions of dollars in simplifying them so that even a literal r3tard can navigate them. People haven't really become more tech savvy, the programs have just become idiot proof. Apple products have the least features and customization of any tech company; they are also the biggest and most profitable. This is not a coincidence. "Web 3.0" is going to require much more work and education on the part of the user compared to just letting proprietary software handle it for you. That is why I am so skeptical of it, because its "IQ requirement" is literally higher than proprietary software, giving it a much smaller potential "audience"

 

Dislike ads? Remove them and support the forum: Subscribe to Fastlane Insiders.

[SharpeningBlade]

The internet and social media have only become so prolific because these massive tech companies have invested billions of dollars in simplifying them so that even a literal r3tard can navigate them. People haven't really become more tech savvy, the programs have just become idiot proof. Apple products have the least features and customization of any tech company; they are also the biggest and most profitable. This is not a coincidence. "Web 3.0" is going to require much more work and education on the part of the user compared to just letting proprietary software handle it for you. That is why I am so skeptical of it, because its "IQ requirement" is literally higher than proprietary software, giving it a much smaller potential "audience"

You make a great point.

I wasn't clear enough in my initial rebuttal, so thank you for expanding on your reasoning.

This is where most of the opportunity lies in Web3, in my opinion.

Internet was harder to use back in the day. People made a lot of money making it 'idiot-proof'

Same thing is likely to happen with Web3. It will require a lot of work. But that's where you make the money

 

[RobH]

You make a great point.

I wasn't clear enough in my initial rebuttal, so thank you for expanding on your reasoning.

This is where most of the opportunity lies in Web3, in my opinion.

Internet was harder to use back in the day. People made a lot of money making it 'idiot-proof'

Same thing is likely to happen with Web3. It will require a lot of work. But that's where you make the money

The steep learning curve is why I think Web3 will be relegated to the back-end.
Remember when Linux was introduced? Big claims were made for it - open source, very secure, etc. But the learning curve was steep, and Windows and Mac had wide moats. So now it exists on servers, mostly.
Blockchain (Web3) will be the same way.

 

[Mac]

I think you massively overestimate:

1. The tech savviness of the average person
2. The concern of the average person for personal privacy, or opensource software ethics

Both of these things need to raise by orders of magnitude in gen pop for the things you posted to come to fruition. The driving force behind web 1.0 and 2.0 was always convenience and fast entertainment, never some kind of 'pioneering technological virtue'. I fail to see what will drive "Web 3.0"

You might think I'm arrogant for saying this... but that's how the internet started; not many people knew how to use it except for the super geeks back in the early 90s.

The only people who are now struggling are the boomers and 50+ demographics. In 20 years from now, this terminology will all be commonplace and that generation will be on its way out. Everyone will know how to use a metamask wallet and other web3 dApps. It may even be taught in schools to children at a young age.

 

Dislike ads? Remove them and support the forum: Subscribe to Fastlane Insiders.

[Kevin88660]

I think you massively overestimate:

1. The tech savviness of the average person
2. The concern of the average person for personal privacy, or opensource software ethics

Both of these things need to raise by orders of magnitude in gen pop for the things you posted to come to fruition. The driving force behind web 1.0 and 2.0 was always convenience and fast entertainment, never some kind of 'pioneering technological virtue'. I fail to see what will drive "Web 3.0"

I agree. But these are just market needs filled be service providers building the “bridges”.

Just like today online and offline banking both exist and complement each other. You can meet someone offline to create something online.

You can also use a centralized platform to operate something that is designed to be decentralized. Bitcoin was supposed to be decentralized. But Centralised exchange and custodianship became popular later as people stilk prefer the habits of having custodians and customer hotline.

 

[Walter Hay]

I think you massively overestimate:

1. The tech savviness of the average person

I am technically quite ignorant. For 20 years I was very happy operating a chemical manufacturing and exporting business using a typewriter, hard wired phones, and telexes for international communication. Later I operated my next international business by traveling and using faxes to place orders and I advanced technically when I bought my first mobile phone, which I carried in a large leather bag slung over my shoulder.

the programs have just become idiot proof

My well developed degree of technical ignorance should qualify me as an idiot, but in fact much of it is due to my unwillingness to put the effort into learning. I sure won't be putting any effort into learning Web 3.

If I'm not the last Luddite in the world ........ There's a market for those who revel in high tech stuff..... Serve the old generation on a silver platter with what they need to continue being part of the world.

Walter
P.S. I'm 83 and still writing business books. All those product sourcing links and international trade links shouldn't just disappear. I will need someone to convert them into something useful for my book readers.