Content
Blockchain, cryptocurrency, Ethereum, NFTs, DAOs, smart contracts, and web3 have become buzzwords that are pretty much unavoidable these days. But despite all the hype, it’s still kinda tough to nail down what all these terms really mean in practical terms. On top of that, the conversation about web3 is super polarizing. Folks seem to be pressured to pick a side—either you're with them or against them—and if you haven’t chosen, people assume you’re secretly on the other team. Max Read pointed out that the so-called "web3 debate" isn’t just one argument but actually two separate ones. First, can blockchain technology actually do things that existing tech can’t, or do it better and more efficiently? And second, will blockchain form the backbone of the internet moving forward, creating powerful new companies and organizations native to this tech? I tend to agree with Max that there’s both a technical question and a business/cultural question tangled up here.
Every day, headlines tell stories of millions lost to scams, and at the same time, tons of people put huge sums into new ventures. The web3 world is full of extremes—big wins and massive losses. So it’s helpful to step back from the daily noise and look at the core philosophies driving the whole movement.
One major theme is decentralisation. Blockchain tech is inherently distributed, which appeals to those frustrated with the dominance of a few huge web services like Facebook or YouTube that have, frankly, caused harm. Sure, the internet was built as a decentralized network from the start, but we’ve grown reliant on centralized services to make the web easy and convenient to use. Even with web3, centralization creeps back in: services like Coinbase for crypto trading, OpenSea for NFTs, and MetaMask as a crypto wallet are becoming the new giants. Centralisation is just easier for most people.
So maybe decentralisation isn’t the secret sauce after all. Instead, ownership seems to be the hot topic right now. NFTs have grabbed a lot of attention as a way to claim ownership, but research suggests the NFT market is heavily inflated, with a small percentage of traders driving most of the volume, often through wash sales to artificially pump prices. Rather than focusing on the market’s flaws, it’s more interesting to think about ownership in terms of attribution and creator rights.
NFTs introduce a new twist by allowing royalties to be paid to original creators every time their work is resold. This idea is pretty powerful—royalties shouldn’t just benefit celebrities but everyday creators too. Think about it: on the current web, it’s easy to copy someone else’s words or work without proper credit. While platforms like Twitter and Tumblr encourage attribution through retweets and reblogs, these are broad tools and don’t guarantee fair or precise credit.
What would be really cool is a system that lets people quote and attribute just small parts of a post—like a few paragraphs—back to the original source, with automatic notifications so creators know when their work is referenced. This kind of tech-based attribution goes beyond the usual copy-paste culture and could help creators reclaim control over their content. Still, any tool only works if there’s a real reason to use it, which means incentives and user habits play a big role.
All in all, web3 isn’t just about flashy tech or inflated markets; it’s about rethinking how we handle decentralisation, ownership, and attribution in a digital world that’s growing increasingly complex and centralized. There’s promise and pitfalls both, and how it all shakes out depends on the tech, the culture around it, and how people choose to engage.
