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.
