Blockchain technology has come a long way. Not long ago, encryption was still on the verge, and the gospel was preached by a few voices. Once the COVID-19 pandemic forced people to have enough time to invest in new interests, their narratives changed. Cryptocurrency has benefited from increasing attention and has entered daily conversations among friends, family, and colleagues.

Even so, it is still in the early days of the encryption era. Widespread adoption remains elusive, and traditional technology gatekeepers still control the digital economy.In order to relax this control, our buildings Decentralized Internet, or Web 3.0, If we continue to maintain the status quo, we must better define the narrative of the stakes.

In the past month, when the sentiment against the centralized controller of Web 2.0 became particularly bad, we had a particularly compelling opportunity to seize the narrative. As we see how the structural inequality of Web 2.0 affects us all, the stakes become clearer.

First, Facebook testified before Congress as a former employee coming Research has shown that the platform puts users’ “profits above safety”. This testimony, combined with a major outage by Facebook, affected all of its products worldwide.Then, finally, an anonymous hacker Publish Amazon’s video game streaming platform Twitch is a treasure trove of data, including source code and creator spending, in an attempt to “promote more destruction and competition in the field of online video streaming.”

Although I do not tolerate unauthorized access to the company’s proprietary information, I certainly understand the sentiment. As Web 3.0 entrepreneurs focused on building an open infrastructure for video streaming, the scale and reach of Twitch, YouTube, and Facebook may stifle innovation. Upstart services don’t have much room to enter areas dominated by the economies of scale (and the opportunity to get eyeballs) enjoyed by these companies.

So, how can we return the Web to its original vision of becoming an open platform and global utility that anyone can contribute and build? We need to seize the right to speak and welcome more builders and users at the core of the booming Web 3.0 ecosystem.

Open code

The open source nature of Web 3.0 means that contributors can collaborate on technology and functionality from the beginning, rather than proprietary code being hacked and leaked. In sharp contrast is the walled garden built and protected by large-scale technological gatekeepers. Once locked inside, there is no recourse or ability to leave. People, companies, and developers are only subject to the whims of the central authority and forced to adapt to changes in products or terms.

I have witnessed the huge impact of these gatekeepers on developers. After our first company was acquired by Groupon, my co-founders and I established a company that relied on the application programming interfaces (APIs) of the main technology gatekeepers: Facebook, Google, Pinterest, and Twitter. Initially, these platforms were more open, allowing us to plug services into these platforms. Suddenly, our access was cut off because these platforms decided to close access to third parties. Our service ultimately failed because these platforms were not kept open. This is a vivid lesson that tells us the risks of building on someone else’s technology stack.

This experience led us to our next adventure: building an open video infrastructure for live broadcasting. By building in an open and decentralized manner, we are able to attract developers, nurture the community, and realign incentives to protect all stakeholders. This is a method that needs to change from a protectionist mentality to a rich mentality. Pies are either only this big. Therefore, competition must be stifled and prevented at all costs, otherwise the sum is greater than the part, and a community can build more value than alone.

related: Resonates: DeFi’s domino effect on NFT and Web 3.0

Transparent economics

In its purest case, the Web 3.0 economy is transparent and permissionless, which allows stakeholders to believe that vested interests will not secretly pull the ropes and control results in their favor.this Creative sponsorship form It is becoming more and more popular every day because it is more friendly to creators than the current options.

These transparent economics are what creators lack in the existing Web 2.0 dynamics. When creators build in a walled garden, they are still locked in whatever economics each platform chooses. If the platform changes these economic conditions, the creator has little recourse: since there are few other options, the choice to leave is usually not economically feasible.

Web 3.0 builders must also emphasize how the removal of tax gatekeepers allows creators to retain more of the money they earn from the community. As Web 3.0 is expected to replace Web 2.0, “retain more of your income” and “support more of what you like” are good narrative boosters. Through this information transmission, this is not only to empower creators, but also to enable fans to donate more money to their favorite creators.

Consistent incentives

The last pillar of Web 3.0 is to coordinate incentives between creators, users, and the platform itself. These incentives will affect the accountability and governance of the platform, which in turn affects toxicity, inclusiveness and control.

related: DeFi and Web 3.0: Unleash creativity through decentralized finance

When adjusting incentives, accountability and governance are the main issues. Web 2.0 gatekeepers have little incentive to “do it right” creators and users. Why do they want it? With little competition, users are trapped in walled gardens. Moreover, as private entities with little external supervision, they can do whatever they want. This is an attitude of “we make rules, accept or give up” and a mentality of “we treat them”.

In Web 3.0, governance is usually decentralized through decentralized autonomous organizations, DAOs, or other deep-rooted community feedback mechanisms. By decentralizing community management from the central authority, there is a tendency for self-restraint. Communities built around shared passions enjoy natural restraint, and when community members cross boundaries, the community will take action. If community members do not like something, they can submit a proposal for the community to vote to change the direction of the platform.

Ultimately, creators hope to establish a more direct relationship with fans and exert influence on the governance of the platforms they use. The Web 3.0 paradigm tries to enable Creator-driven platform This also allows users to become the owners of the platform, usually coordinated through tokens. Since they benefit directly from the development of the platform, users are motivated to provide key services such as moderation to prevent things such as hate attacks.

Of course, nothing is perfect. Web 3.0 will still struggle with some of the audit issues faced by other major platforms. Critics of decentralized platforms say that the lack of central authority will make moderation more difficult.

However, as more and more platforms appear to serve niche communities (rather than a single entity trapping everyone in a walled garden), these smaller communities will be toxic to the large platforms with global influence. Said that it is no longer so attractive. When there are dozens or hundreds of platforms, it becomes more difficult to peddle misinformation and troll.

related: Adapt or die: venture capital and encryption, blockchain, DAO, and Web 3.0

What’s next for Web 3.0

Web 3.0 builders must recapture this narrative and go beyond “winner takes all” to “community first.” This is not easy.There is still a long way to go before Web 3.0 produce More creator wealth than the Internet.

With the expansion of Web 3.0, we must also protect ourselves from reverting to the mean. It would be a shame to simply copy the existing gatekeeper model. This is why we must continue to subtly convey the narrative of Web 3.0 to help developers and everyday users understand the value of Web 3.0—and the pitfalls of staying true to the current dynamics of Web 2.0.

After watching the recent setbacks of Web 2.0, it is clear that we will continue to get influential examples of how far we have deviated – and what we need to do to restore the Internet as the original vision of openness is additive to society And creative place.

We are committed to this for a long time. We must first spread and listen to users’ opinions and build with a community mindset.

This article does not contain investment advice or recommendations. Every investment and trading action involves risks, and readers should research on their own when making a decision.

The views, thoughts and opinions expressed here are only those of the author, and do not necessarily reflect or represent the views and opinions of Cointelegraph.