Web3 – Less trust, more truth
Web3 is “Less trust, more truth”.
We can think of blockchain technology as a digital service without service providers .
When we use Facebook, Google, or do something else, we’re actually using an organization that’s owned by an individual, usually it’s run by a CEO, there’s a group of shareholders who make decisions, we access their services, and they provide us with those services .
In any case, it always involves this intermediate service provider, and these intermediate service providers have absolute control. So if we think of the internet as a big country, the country is actually run by a bunch of dictators, each of them has their own territory, almost feudal. And the reality is that we need to move beyond this very feudal system because, as we’ve found in the past, it’s not the best for innovation.
Web3 is a trustless paradigm where I don’t need to trust someone to know what the outcome will be in order to make a decision . I can understand for myself how the world works well enough to make this decision. I don’t need to give my benefits to other people who use it for me and trust that they will do it in a way that is good for me.
Sometimes I start my talk with a quote from Buckminster Fuller: You can’t change the world by fighting. The way to change the world is basically to create a new paradigm that makes the old way of doing things irrelevant. Back in 2013, when I first really understood how blockchain works, how Bitcoin works, I started to realize that this was a new paradigm. It’s a paradigm that will invalidate the way we work, and the way it’s been working for the past few hundred years. That’s what got me excited, that’s what got me involved.
What will the world of Web 3.0 look like in 10 or 20 years? I want a world where we have more sovereignty over our interactions with each other and our own decisions .
In my opinion, the internet has helped a lot of institutions consolidate their power and become more decentralized. Some of them are new institutions, like Twitter and Facebook, but there are also banks and governments. Some governments are doing certain things that are not necessarily in the interest of individuals, but because of technology, governments can do them. For example, Snowden’s revelations in 2013 exposed the United States’ surveillance of the world.
I think we should fight back technically so that we don’t get reduced to a very small group of people with almost all the power in the world, because that creates a huge risk of systemic failure. When you put so much power in the hands of someone, that person can make mistakes, do the wrong thing, or even go crazy, which is a big problem for the whole world.
Polkadot has a “free execution model”
One of my goals with Polkadot is to completely eliminate the need for mainstream adopters to use cryptographic tokens. This is a huge difference between Polkadot’s “free execution model” and the smart contract transaction execution model introduced by Ethereum .
In an economic sense, users of applications built on Ethereum are being enslaved by Ethereum. These users must own Ether, and usually some other token, on Ethereum to use any application built with Ethereum smart contracts. That’s a huge limitation… Imagine if you had to pay Google a tenth of a cent for your electricity every time you searched on Google, which of course wouldn’t work. I think a smart contract platform like Ethereum, it’s very difficult to achieve real mainstream adoption, it’s very difficult to be adopted by billions of users.
On Polkadot, the parachain pays for the system, so users of the blockchain don’t have to hold tokens or pay for applications. As an app provider, you gain more freedom. There is economic freedom, which does not require users to have access to DOT tokens, as Ethereum requires, and technical freedom that allows you to actually use the full blockchain capabilities.
Polkadot already has the largest developer community outside of Ethereum. This proves that Polkadot offers developers fundamentally more possibilities beyond the smart contract model pioneered by Ethereum.
Polkadot offers a new alternative that is more general and abstract, a step further in what it can do and its power than we imagined when we designed and developed Ethereum in 2014.
Polkadot is promoting a multi-chain future
Polkadot is trying to turn a single chain into a “multi-chain” of shards, not only that, but a so-called “heterogeneous multi-chain” , where each shard is dedicated to doing a specific job efficiently. Not only that, but it has to be done on a real network whose total value rivals that of most companies in the Fortune 500.
2022 is the start of the next chapter in Polkadot’s story, unlike any previous year. As more and more parachain teams win auctions and join the Polkadot party, we will see the prospect of extended hyperconnectivity under the single security umbrella provided by Polkadot. With over 150 chains in development serving various purposes, many of which already have testnets, there is a lot to look forward to.
Bitcoin extremism still exists today, and it has led to a very harmful environment. While at Ethereum, we got a lot of “hate” from the Bitcoin world, a lot of unnecessary, unreasonable suspicion, and sometimes worse. It’s almost like the crypto world’s version of nationalism.
One of the things I’d like to address with Polkadot is try to bring us into a slightly less crypto-nationalist era where we have a lot of different chains that operate under some kind of general system and try to reduce the “if you stand in line” Once you have this chain, you can’t be associated with another chain”, which seems to be very common in the crypto ecosystem.
How the crypto industry is responding to regulation
In pursuit of high transaction throughput, many chains ignore the fact that decentralization and security are not optional features , although if you sacrifice the decentralization of the network, you can indeed have higher Transaction throughput…so when you see some networks claiming to be public chains with very high TPS, then a lot of the time, it’s not a kind of comparison between those chains and some truly decentralized networks.
The more you centralized, there may be greater regulators eyeing, and solemnly ask you to obtain the relevant license; and the more you point to the center, the less the possibility that it towards point the direction of development seems is a reasonable choice…
It seems that those crypto projects that are not peer-to-peer and more neutral will require a license, which I think may be similar to the standards of banking regulations. If this is the case, then most crypto projects may not survive in their current form within a year or two. I think regulation may be in place in two to three years, but it’s always good to be prepared early. Especially when the technology you need to mitigate risk is hard to come by.
At Parity, we are committed to making everything peer-to-peer. We want to make sure that our technology falls into the category that doesn’t require regulation. Solutions built on Substrate should be true Web3.0 solutions and should be truly peer-to-peer. Similarly, for Polkadot, we will make it the first peer-to-peer, secure, and scalable platform for free execution.
Posted by:CoinYuppie，Reprinted with attribution to:https://coinyuppie.com/web3-will-give-us-more-decision-making-power/
Coinyuppie is an open information publishing platform, all information provided is not related to the views and positions of coinyuppie, and does not constitute any investment and financial advice. Users are expected to carefully screen and prevent risks.