Web3 is praised by scholars, authors, and other writers for its “decentralization”, “data rights restoration”, “privacy”, and other stuff like that. Many people treat the advent of Web 3.0 as a paradigm shift in almost every sphere of human lives, social media included. However, as you might be aware, Web3 social media are not widely adopted.
In the following article, we will go briefly through the essence of Web3, define it, assess its viability, look into the differences from mainstream social networks, and examine why it is not all the vogue yet. Let’s do this!
What is Web3
As the name suggests, Web3 is preceded by two iterations of itself. Indeed, Web1 was known as the “read-only” internet. Web2 is about users’ collaboration on social networks, empowerment of individual content creators, and remarkable interactivity.
Web3 is grounded in blockchain, artificial intelligence, augmented reality & virtual reality, big data, and some other concepts of the foreseeable future. In the utopian world, Web3 has the following characteristics:
- Decentralization
- Interoperability
- Data ownership & privacy
- Tokenization & cryptocurrencies
- Big data
- Active AI usage, e.g., for personalized feed
Not all of them are true. Specifically, users cannot really control which kind of data to share (more on that in the following sections). But there are indeed some potent advantages to using Web3 and decentralized social networks.
Pros and cons of Web3
Theoretically, social media tokenization can serve as a boon to create more content, get paid, and enjoy copyright protection. Blockchain by its definition prevents previously recorded information from being rewritten. Long story short, imagine a thousand ledgers synchronized automatically, so whenever you add a transaction it is automatically copy-pasted and stored. Moreover, imagine each subsequent transaction referring to the previous one — that’s how the chain emerges, hence the name “blockchain”.
There is no central authority to call back the ledgers and rewrite the information in there. Blockchain becomes more credible with the new users hopping in the bandwagon. There is only one way to rewrite the information written in the past, and that is by having 51% of users and their computational power willing to overwrite the data from the past. But even then, those who are against such an action can separate and start working on their own chain, thus creating a so-called fork.
These forks are very bad for stability, especially if there is any kind of monetary incentive involved, because they simply duplicate the money. And when the money is printed out of thin air, the inflation befalls.
Next, if you make a mistake of transferring some funds to a wrong person… there is no way to revoke the transaction. Unless you can convince the majority of the users to re-work on the chain (and to step on some of their own transactions in the process). Considering how many trolls are out there online — good luck with that.
Moreover, the wisdom of the crowd simply does not always work. For example, people used to believe in the edge of the world. Applied to blockchain, if 80% of the users say that affiliate marketers are gays — well… welcome to the club, buddies. That’s the problem rooted deep in democracy itself, which blockchain actively promotes. People might simply be not smart enough for critical thinking and start to enforce their own beliefs at the cost of universal truth, just like opinion leaders do.
Web3-based social media might give rise to niche-based communities. Since the participants of one blockchain can fork it any time a major update is in place. At the time of writing the article, the mergers between blockchains are unknown, because it requires one group to give up on one’s principles in favor of another group and overall unity. This can lead to a problem that no Web3 social media will be stable, since it can be split at any time.
And if you try to counter it by giving more rights to some technicians, maintaining the blockchain, you violate the core idea of distributed system, which is blockchain all about. In other words, those nodes with more rights resemble central servers, which can be hacked and used to siphon off all the sensitive data.
Decentralized social networks
Some examples of the most prominent decentralized social networks out there.
- Diamond App is a decentralized social media platform built on the DeSo blockchain technology. It offers users control over their social identities and the ability to monetize their content. The platform introduces creator coins, allowing users to invest in creators and even convert likes into actual currency.
- Minds is an open-source Web3 social media platform that prioritizes privacy and decentralization. Users earn Minds tokens for supporting content and can exchange them for other cryptocurrencies or fiat currencies. The platform encourages free speech and hosts diverse communities.
- Audius is a decentralized music streaming platform designed for musicians and music lovers. Artists can upload, share, and monetize their music while smart contracts ensure fair revenue distribution. The platform also features a native crypto called “Audio” ($AUDIO).
- Chingari is a decentralized video-sharing social media platform that empowers creators with its GARI token. Users can earn tokens for various activities on the platform and exchange them for fiat currency or other cryptocurrencies. Chingari boasts a large global community.
- Mastodon is a decentralized social media platform with over 10 million registered users. It operates on a federated model, where independent servers form a network. Users have autonomy in choosing instances that align with their preferences. Mastodon emphasizes decentralized social media without its own native crypto.
More platforms for your exploration.
Decentralized Social Platforms:
User Reward Systems:
New Content Management Models:
Decentralized Identity Systems:
Decentralized Content Markets:
Decentralized Feedback and Reputation Systems:
Decentralized Voting and Decision-Making Systems:
Decentralized Recommendation Systems:
These Web3 platforms prioritize user control, privacy, and data ownership while often incorporating token economies to reward user participation.
Why web3 is not all the vogue
Web3 is not widely adopted in social media marketing world for a couple of reasons. For starters, there is a good rule, which states that if something works — don’t touch it.
Via: Pinterest
Related to social media, people don’t really care about all the advantages of decentralization and AI intelligence. Current social media work fine, users can post stuff online and interact with each other, and data privacy is not much of a concern, since people are happy to share their real identities online, e.g., Twitter, Tinder, and Facebook.
As for passwords and sensitive data protection, blockchain and, subsequently, Web3 are unable to protect them by definition. Those of you, who are into Bitcoin, might be familiar with its whitepaper.
It states explicitly that the transactions (or any kind of data) have to be shared to all the participants of the distributed network, similar to stock exchange. There are few ways to relate exact actors to some pieces of data, but it is not impossible. Regarding the passwords, it means that the access codes are stored by every participant, since the database is distributed between all the members by definition. However, no one can tell to whom the password in question belongs.
That’s why Ethereum blockchain uses mnemotics, or seed words, which serve as the only way to restore one’s password. If this list of words is lost — there is no moderation to look through your case and decide to grant you access, based on reasoning. Users ought to be prudent and responsible, which is a rare commodity nowadays, considering the people gluing their hair to follow the “Gorilla Glue Challenge” and winning over a couple of likes.
All the monetary incentives, related to tokenization, are simply… useless for the end user, because the influencers monetize their content anyway. The regulators feel uneasy about blockchain and decentralization — take the fork of money alone, for example. Plus, Bitcoin has the heritage of being used on the dark web — something sinister for the average user. In a nutshell, distributed social networks simply bring no significant benefits to the end users to justify mass adoption. All the advantages are somewhat hidden from the sight of an average Joe.
Conclusion
Web3, with its promise of decentralization and data control, faces adoption hurdles in the world of social media. Existing networks are deeply ingrained, and Web3’s benefits may not justify switching. Challenges include irrevocable transactions and blockchain’s data-sharing nature. While its potential is intriguing, the path to reshaping social media remains uncertain.
If you want to reach new GEOs and audiences, maybe it is all waiting for you on Telegram? We’ve prepared some material about Telegram audiences. What are the messenger’s users like this year? How old they are, what they do, and what they are interested in!
