Even though I consider myself a cryptographer, I am not particularly attracted to the word “crypto”. I don’t think I’m too old, but I’m much more likely to click on “the internet remembers everything” memes about how “crypto” used to mean “cryptography” than I click on the latest NFT news.
To be frank, I do not share the enthusiasm of a generation for the transition of all aspects of life to a tool economy.
Although even strictly at the technological level, I have not yet managed to believe in these ideas. So, with all the attention that has recently been given to what is now called web3, I decided to take a closer look at what is happening in this space, so as not to miss anything.
What do I think about web1 and web2?
Web3 is a somewhat ambiguous term, which makes it difficult to make an accurate assessment of what web3’s ambitions should be, but the general thesis seems to be that web1 has been decentralized, web2 has centralized everything into platforms, and web3 is decentralizing everything again. Web3 should give us all the benefits of web2 but in a decentralized way.
Perhaps it would be nice to clarify why centralized platforms arose in the first place. In my opinion, the explanation is quite simple:
- People don’t want to manage their own servers and never will.
The premise for web1 was that everyone on the Internet would become both a publisher and consumer of content and a publisher and consumer of infrastructure.
Each of us would have our own web server with our own website, our own mail server for our own e-mail, our own finger server for our own status messages, our own chargen server for character generation…
However – and I don’t think it’s possible to express it even more clearly is not what people want. People don’t want to manage their own servers.
At this point, even nerds don’t want to run their own servers. Even organizations that build software every day don’t want to run their own servers. If we’ve learned anything about the world, it’s that people don’t want to run their own servers. Companies that have come up offering to do it for you have been successful, and companies that iteratively develop new functionality based on what’s possible on these networks have been even more successful NFT.
- The protocol evolves much more slowly than the.
After 30+ years, email is still unencrypted; at the same time, WhatsApp went from no encryption to full e2ee within a year. People are still trying to standardize reliable video transmission over IRC; Slack, meanwhile, lets you create custom emoji based on your face NFT.
It’s not a funding issue. Something truly decentralized is hard to modify and often remains frozen in time. This is a problem for technology – the rest of the ecosystem is moving very fast, and if you do not keep up with it, then you will fail. There are entire parallel industries focused on defining and refining methodologies like Agile to try and figure out how to organize huge groups of people so that they can move as quickly as possible. Because it’s critical.
When the technology itself is more conducive to stagnation than movement, that is already a problem. A previously surefire recipe for success is to take a protocol from the 90s that is stuck in time, centralize it, and modernize it quickly NFT.
But web3 is going to be different, so let’s see. In order to quickly navigate and understand what the future might hold for us, I decided to create several decentralized applications (dApps), as well as my own NFT.