This very popular term is being used a lot to describe anything to do with blockchain, but what is it exactly? In simple terms, Web 3, refers to the next version of the internet that relies on decentralized protocols and uses less centralized companies and providers.

 

Web 1 and Web 2

Web 1 is a simple collection of links and homepages. Besides reading and publishing pages (with a lot of effort) there is not a lot more you could do. This version is simplified as the read version, where the main use for users was to read what was already published.

Web 2 that followed was capable of writing and posting other forms of content with more ease and simplicity. When it took a lot of effort to publish pages and content, it was not a very collaborative environment. Web 2 allowed for users to post comments, blogs, and interact more with other forms of content. This gave rise to social media platforms that we all know and recognize. This version was categorized as read & write.

 

Web 3 as the read, write, and own version

Web 3 has a unique addition of being able to “own” your data. In previous versions the owners of the platform has control and oversight of the data that was posted. This means that all your data is owned by big tech companies, and you have little oversight on what they do with the data or how they use it.

With decentralized protocol (what Web 3 is built on), the information is no longer “owned” or managed by a central database or entity. Anything can be tokenized (monitored and tracked through the blockchain), making it easier for various parties to easily view data and ownership.

There are various new ways to utilize Web 3; NFTs, cryptocurrencies, tickets, and new applications being brought out continuously.

 

Web 3 Issues and Practicality

While the idea of being able to view ownership and better review data is nice, there are many flaws in this new Web 3 premise.

 

Idea vs Application

The blockchain still has to be created and set up in the first place, and the creators usually have the most control over the networks. You still have visibility and oversight (with the ledger and data being public), the system creators contain majority control and interest in whatever protocol this start.

Creating a truly decentralized protocol serves little benefit to the creators, and can lead to a system that does not continue to develop and improve with no benefit to the creators or developers.

Permanent

While you can view ledgers (copies of transactions or changes on the blockchain), there is very little you can do to change or update it. While this is great for security, it can lead to problems in an operational sense. Mistakes or errors committed are permeant, with little to no recourse or fix. It would require shifting to a whole new ledger and there is no single party that can do this.

 

Web 3 permanent, a fad, or just a term

The argument can be made for all three, since the term Web 3 really refers to the idea of decentralized data and protocols. Majority of platforms won’t change, ang the existing system for all potential use cases will continue to operate with the status quo.

The idea and movement is there, but to see real change there will have to be continue improvements and adoption. We’ll have to see what the future holds, but I for one am all for it.