A lot is being made about Web 3.0. There is also a great deal of resistance. The reality is that it is not going to be stopped.
This is a natural evolution of the Internet. The ability to stop this is as likely as stopping the earlier progressions. Of course, we are calling Web 3.0 early now as compared to in hindsight with Web 2.0.
Nevertheless, we are dealing with a transformation in the basic structure of the Internet. Right now, we are dealing with a system that is not in favor of the users. As the old saying goes, we are the product.
Web 3.0 promises to change all this. We are looking at communities being of importance as opposed to the platforms. This is something that is going to be a radical difference.
Data Ownership
One of the keys is the ownership of data. We know that whatever we type on Twitter or Facebook resides on their servers. This means all is property of those companies. We have no right to the data and only can access it with their permission.
An extension of this is true account ownership. With Twitter, as an example, we can engage as long as there is no violation of the terms of service. Of course, this is something that can be rather questionable considering how bans occur.
The problem is not only does one lose the ability to engage, but all data tied to the account is lost. While it exists on the company server, there is no way for the user to find it. Unless the account is unbanned, all that was posted over the years is gone.
Web 3.0 completely alters this. By utilitizing the private key system so common to cryptography, people can access their wallets regardless. This means whatever is tied to it is there via the key.
Assets are now property of the individual, not the game or platform. The challenge with Web 2.0 is that it cannot be designed to fit this new model.
Failure Of Web 2.0
How long do we go without seeing someone posting something online pertaining to an account being banned by Twitter or YouTube. It happens regularly and we all know people who fall into this category.
For most, losing it is a pain in the hindend yet is not fatal. Perhaps there is some business related to it. Some influencers on YouTube can find their earnings hurt a great deal. however, for the most part, a ban isn't the end of the world for most people.
The situation changes completely when we start to have assets tied to these social media accounts. We can think a wallet as a digital identity. Having assets in our wallet is not something that people want to lose.
What happens when a platform like Twitter bans an account that is tied to cryptocurrency or NFTs? What kind of regulatory nightmare does this open up?
Remember, in Web 3.0, what we are really talking about is data. Cryptocurrency, in whatever form, is a digital asset. In other words, it is really nothing more than data.
How do the established social media companies compete in this realm? The same is true in the gaming industry? There are 3 billion people around the world who play games online. Are all of them going to proceed without owning their assets?
It is not likely.
There are billions of people who will alter their online engagement. This is something that we have to pay attention to. Web 3.0 is not going to be stopped because it is the natural progression of the Internet.
Just like Web 1.0 companies were illl-suited to operate in a Web 2.0 world, the same is true of this transformation.
If you found this article informative, please give an upvote and rehive.
gif by @doze
logo by @st8z
Posted Using LeoFinance Alpha
Spot-on as always Taskmaster! I have witnessed the downfall of Web 2 (specifically YouTube, IG, and Twitter) over the past 5-6 years (I left Facebook's legacy platform in the summer of 2017).
I have watched countless YouTubers get shadow-banned, censored, de-monetized, had their videos taken down, the overzealous supposed enforcement of "copyright" which is in itself a perpetual gate-keeping of information.
With that being said, I was an early participant with LBRY & using Odysee, before they got put down by the SEC. Odysee was very promising, but they went the fiat route, instead of incorporating crypto tipping and payments, they went with Stripe, a global conglomerate that has an excessive amount of influence and power over global commerce and information sharing/monetization.
I have heard many YouTubers have joined Rokfin, but the token, the platform uses, is nothing more than a utility token with low liquidity, once again, ignoring more robust coins with better tokenomics in favor of creating their own, and leading to liquidity bottlenecks.
Twitter might be the most egregious of the 3, since it is commonly seen as the digital "public square." The Twitter Files demonstrate that governments and NGOs use Twitter to censor and control narratives, not allowing for any semblance of free speech on the platform.
Private keys change that entirely, and I don't see any way for the legacy socialist media platforms to include them without completely disassembling their existing profit-driven user-as-the-product business model.
Posted Using LeoFinance Beta
I agree with what you said. There are so many opportunities on Hive. We just need to keep building and adding to the offering. Liquidity is a big issue on many of the platforms that tried to incorporate crypto.
Posted Using LeoFinance Beta
Not to mention, as I'm sure you heard, Bittrex is shutting down US operations next month. So there goes one of the last CEXs that listed $HIVE. We need legitimate REAL WORLD offramps from fiat to cryptocurrency, much like how there are cryptocurrency ATMs that enable buying/selling of several major coins, although they're limited usually to $BTC, $ETH, $DASH, $LTC, $BCH
Agreed! They will continue operating the same as they always have clueless that the rules have changed and that "We The People" are the ones who changed them.
They will try to hold on and maintain the status quo.
Posted Using LeoFinance Beta
I think the biggest issue with gaming right now is the difference in quality. Although I can't really say the triple A gaming studios are doing a great job when they pump out games in a broken state. In a way, I kind of feel that they want quality more than ownership right now. So the best way to proceed is to make a great game and people will naturally show up. That should come first before the economic factor.
Posted Using LeoFinance Beta
I agree. Quality games are important. It is like anything...just tokenize a project and you will find that it isnt successful if it doesnt provide a valid user experience.
Posted Using LeoFinance Beta
I am not very much familiar with this field because I am a novice but I find it informative.
Thank you!
https://leofinance.io/threads/@mercadomaestro/re-leothreads-2cieufagq
The rewards earned on this comment will go directly to the people ( mercadomaestro ) sharing the post on LeoThreads,LikeTu,dBuzz.