Just the mention of it elicits mixed reactions from those involved in cryptocurrency. Web 3.0 promises to be an upgrade over the old system. What, however, does this mean?
To get to the bottom of this, we have to look at what Web 2.0 really is. In retail terms, it could be considered nothing more than a bait-and-switch.
Are you unfamiliar with this phrase?
Basically, this is a tactic long used by retail operations. The idea is to get you into the store under one premise while switching things up to get you to leave with another. In this instance, premise equals product.
A company will advertise a particular item. This will get you to visit the location. Once there, a couple of methods can be employed. One course of action could be they are sold out. The marketing took place with scarcity. Of course, since you made the trip, and need the item, they do have a selection of other options, for more money. The wonderful deal that was promoted suddenly turns into a more expensive proposition.
Another approach is to use a salesperson to steer one away from the item. The marketing brings in a qualified buyer. Here is someone with the need and means, two criteria when sizing up a prospect, to get the item.
Under this scenario, the salesperson will offer all kinds of reasons why the advertised item should not be purchased. Instead, the more costly option will be pushed, arriving at the same conclusion.
Web 2.0: The Epitome of the Bait and Switch
The situation described above describes Web 2.0, especially social media platforms.
When the application is in the early stages of the S Curve, as depicted by the image above, it is welcoming and accommodating. The pretense put forth is our platform is free to use and we are here to offer a quality user experience.
Of course, during this period, the userbase is growing. Individuals find the application offers ease of use along with an enjoyable experience. Over time, more features are added, enhancing the impact upon the user.
Inevitably, growth slows. Here is where problems arise. The premise that was originally utilized to draw in users no longer applies.
Suddenly, the interests in the stakeholders diverges.
The founders along with venture capital people are still looking for growth. Monetization becomes paramount since the money players want to get paid. On the other side, the users simply want to continue their experience, with more being added to the platform.
Since growth is slowing, the networks turn to extraction as their model. Historically, this was done with advertising and data mining.
Neither of these is inherently negative. The challenge is that it does not mix with the initial premise. Also, the users do not benefit from this, at least not overly.
Stakeholders interests are no longer aligned. Web 2.0 platforms always reach this point. It is inherent in their business model.
Web 3.0: Tokenization Solves This
The power of Web 3.0 is the alignment of the stakeholders.
Tokenization instantly puts everyone on the same page. By having financial stake, all holders have the same interest. At no point is there a divergence.
What is that interest?
Simply, it all boils down to the growth of the network. All participants who are holding the token have this goal. Naturally, this can take on many different forms, from simply more users to greater profitability.
Whatever the focus, continued network growth is baseline from which all operate. With Web 2.0, there comes a point where it is only the money players who care about that.
Take Facebook.
At this time, there are a couple billion users on that platform. Do any of the users care if another 5,000 people sign up? That will not impact them in the slightest. Nor do they care if the platforms generate another 5% in ad revenue. These people are not sharing in it.
They might, although not likely, care about the company extracting their data and selling it to anyone with a few bucks.
Ultimately, the Web 2.0 business model necessitates figuring out ways to extract more value from the network. Again, this is not a bad thing until we look at who is benefitting. When it is a Facebook, Google, or X, the owners are the ones profiting. This means the shareholders for each company.
Notice how it does not say users.
With Web 2.0, for the most part, they are two distinct groups. Web 3.0 solves this by potentially making them one. The users have financial stake in the system, hence have the incentive to ensure its long term growth. A lot of the tactics employed, especially by social media, are tolerable if the users are also the ones benefitting.
With Web 3.0, they can.
The S Curve is employed to show how things unfold. When the point is reached where things flatten out, the stakeholders can innovation and come up with ways to keep the network growing. After all, unlike Web 2.0, they do have a vested interest.
Posted Using InLeo Alpha
We are seeing this more blatantly now. Before, companies just collect and sell the user data in the background. But with the emergence of AI, companies are outright saying they are selling the user data, with no regard for the users.
No need to regard the users. They keep adding more utility which keeps people happy but the monetization structure doesnt change.
People are thrilled to use chatbots for free not realizing they were behind the training of them by providing the data.
Free to use, monetization, and finally extraction, an accurate description of our experience with Web 2.0.
That about sums it up.
Web 3.0 is a way to overcome this bait. HIVe is the way.
Well I think #web3 is the solution but yes Hive certainly fits into that.
Of course, for that to occur, people on Hive actually have to post on Hive.
I wrote an article similar to this about how control in my view is fair. Control is good when all not few have a say or benefit and this is what web3 and Blockchain tech aims to solve.
Depends upon what people do with it.
Unfortunately, the masses always want more control then when granted it, they do nothing.
Opportunities are rarely taken advantage of by most of the population.
You are also making a good point here. Hope we don't throw this one to the dust
The early returns are not promising. It seems that human nature keeps going along in the same manner.
I have always said this correction will take time. It's difficult to change habit. but web3 definitely will get the needed attention
I wrote a similar article today,
https://inleo.io/@daniasi/web2-building-something-better-betters-web3
What's your view, Thanks
Thank you for this wonderful write-up, it has really helped me to know what web 2 does and what Web 3 would do to prove to be better improved than web 2.
Thanks for those wonderful instances, they really drove home the points.
Web 2 uses our potentials to profit the owners. Web3 will be a whole lot of relief
Web 2.0 has always a strict algorithm at place no matter which platform you choose to use and it always will benefit the owners and not the users of the platform unless the follow that "narrative" that is why the alternative media is always using terms as "Woke" all the time cause there are certain "political narratives" that needs to be met.
👍 !PGM
sharing is caring
Hmmmm, web2 tothology so funny, web3 to the moon! #microearning
!CTP
#freecomplements