Will there be Centralized Web 3.0? - Contradictions
Hi there everyone, it's TheRingMaster back again and excited to have the strength to write my blog
I skipped a blog yesterday because I wasn't feeling too well but I'm a bit better and happy to share another one
Well there's been a lot of questions on my mind regarding Web 3.0 and Hive in particular since I'm not too old on the platform. Some of the blogs I write is more like an attempt to understand the Blockchain and the Web 3.0 experience much better and I'm learning each and everyday.
There's this one particular question on my mind and would love to discuss it.
This blog is very much opened for all opinions that would answer the question I. The very best way possible.
Decentralization
One very sweet advantage we get from being on Web 3.0, Hive is "Decentralization" . We the users have control over our own data and are free to express ourselves without fear of having our content manipulated or taken down by some organization or the government.
Decentralization is the reason why I'm able to express my honest opinions even about the government and how things are being done. However I'm tempted to ask and ponder over whether one day we might have a level of centralization on Web 3.0.
- Yes it's indeed very contradictory to think of such a thing since Web 3.0 is built on the principle of Decentralization but hear me out on why I think that could happen.
Centralized Web 2.0 social platforms like Facebook and YouTube have been around for well over a decade to two. Do you remember when these platforms started?
It seemed like a great online platform to express ourselves, share our lives within others and enjoy great content until things kept progressing and the organizations that developed these platforms started attempting to take more control over the user data and also regulate what happened.
The data they took was needed for analysis to serve more accurate ads to each user, it was needed to sell to third-party organizations and the data was also exploited heavily but same organizations.
Facebook for example was charged with selling user data to third-party organizations and that was against user privacy.
Also the government got involved and started taking down content they felt was against their interests. These are the main issues that led to why Web 3.0 was needed. Web 3.0 is still in the early stages of development and who knows how it would look like ten to twenty years from now.
The Government keeps pushing and fighting to gain more control over anything they don't already have control over including Blockchain, crypto and Web 3.0. Who knows what new laws or regulations could be set that would make Web 3.0 look less decentralized.
At the moment, the communities, witnesses and server developers have some level of influence on the Hive Blockchain and they seem to be doing well. I'm hoping things stay good and nobody comes with a huge power to influence the entire chain in a way that will go against the majority.
Decentralization is good but there's a downside. People with Higher stakes have more influence. If the wrong people have Higher Stakes, the worse could actually happen.
Although the way Web 3.0 works is such that if you have higher stakes, you will be the most affected if the platform goes down so I guess those guys will be more responsible. However if we have high stakes guys that say "Damn The Consequences" I'm thinking that could lead to some trouble for lot's of people.
I'm really hoping the friction between Government and Cryptocurrency ends so the crypto world can progress smoothly.
There are questions that need to be answered in Web 3.0 like who exactly determines all the rules? And I'm guessing you'll say the people take a vote but if the wrong vote is taken, wouldn't that lead to chaos?
There's certainly a need for a little amount of centralization in the hands of qualified people and I guess it has to be the community leaders like Ecency team or Inleo Team.
Some controversial Problems
I remember reading a blog about Downvotes by @incublus today and it kinda explains my point.
Who's to decide when it's right to give a downvote to a blog or comment?
Some give Downvotes maybe because they have a personal problem with the author, perhaps the content broke a rule or they didn't agree with what was written.
What if the downvote was made unfairly out of emotions. This is what I mean by the downside of Decentralization and I fear this could be the excuse that would be used by anyone that seems to have some kind of centralized power of Web 3.0.
Yes Web 3.0 is in its early stages but we really need to tackle some of the issues it has before the issues becomes a basis for why we would some level of centralization. Freedom is great but law and order is necessary for progress and for a system to exist or thrive.
I would love to get your thoughts, opinions and feedback on this particular blog question.
If some level of centralization is needed, to what degree do we need this centralization in order to maintain the Decentralized quality of Web 3.0?
- Thank you so much for the time friends and would be waiting for your thoughts on this.
Congratulations @theringmaster! You have completed the following achievement on the Hive blockchain And have been rewarded with New badge(s)
Your next target is to reach 7000 comments.
You can view your badges on your board and compare yourself to others in the Ranking
If you no longer want to receive notifications, reply to this comment with the word
STOPCheck out our last posts:
Can't wait to reach the next target @hivebuzz you're always reliable 💯🥰
You're welcome @theringmaster. Looking forward to you reaching your new target 😅
Absolutely, already working my way to it
A friend here once said there is centralization in decentralization. And it seems some people will always have more measure of control and stake than others. That could (and have) lead to abuse. For example, a whale here might not like you or your project. Its possible that he uses his huge stake to remove your earnings through downvotes. And if he has a large circle of friends, he might influence them to do same. The community might want to help you, but their stake is small. That is an unfortunate scenario where centralization might rear its ugly head in a decentralized environment like Hive.
For me and most of us, we love decentralization at its current state because it has given us something better than centralization. However, it still has and will always have elements of centralization. How strong the community could be to counter the power of a few powerful friends would be a measure of how strong the community could be to fight censorship.
Wow, you have clearly explained it very well to me big brother.. I finally understand it now.. no matter how decentralized we get there's always going to be a measure of centralization.. I'm starting to realize those with power always determine the outcome whether Web 3.0 or not... Thank you so much big brother.. it is well understood now !PIZZA !WEED
@fokusnow!
@theringmaster passed you the virtual joint!If you do not want to receive these comments, please reply with !STOP
Excellent post, brother. As I mentioned in the Wave, governments of the world, most of which are presently puppets to very dark agendas, will always seek greater control, especially now, since the whole slave matrix is in the process of collapsing, so desperation is high, and actions ever-more extreme. There will never be a cooperation between that kind of government and authentic cryptocurrencies, because the entire idea of blockchain technology, that started with Bitcoin, is to take the power of money out of the hands of banks and governments, and put it squarely back in the hands of the people, where it belongs. The system must be 100% decentralized, or even better distributed, or centralized control will gain a foothold again. 😁 🙏 💚 ✨ 🤙
I'm starting to realize you just might be right about this brother.. it certain needs to be 💯 decentralized
Only that which cannot be controlled is a trustworthy infrastructure. 😁 🙏 💚 ✨ 🤙
That's deep Wisdom big bro
I'm grateful to be able to share what is useful, and it's marvelous that you found it so! 😁 🙏 💚 ✨ 🤙
A thought provoking post !
One of the biggest issues slowing down mass adoption of Web3 is decentralisation. Although leaders will always appear in any organisation, in the case of Web3there are a number of people creating projects and leading initiatives within it, but there isn't a single visionary leader.
There's no Steve Jobs, Zuckerberg, Bezos or Musk. That makes it hard for the wider public to find someone to follow. It means that development is a vague amorphous thing that happens without central planning. It's a massive hindrance to mass adoption.
But what it also does is protect Web3 from government regulation or interference by legacy companies. There is no one person they can bribe, buy or threaten. It's not based in a single country. The worst they can do is make it hard to push cash into an onramp, and to bluster, threaten and use propaganda. There's no single leader they can imprison or assassinate.
So if Web3 gets centralised, it'll be something we do to ourselves ! I hope we're wiser than that.
My goodness you're so right about this big bro, we certainly do need visionary leaders but I hope it's more than one because one person as you said could easily be bribe or threatened.... I hope things stay Decentralized.. thanks so much for this comment 💯