I have my doubts about what kind of innovation the current Web3 projects (I'm referring to the blockchain-based Web3, not the AI-based Web3) have brought to the table.
The common features of today's Web3 products include:
- They have corresponding internet products or revolve around NFTs.
- Logging in with a wallet connection.
- Writing contracts once, but due to poor performance, layering on centralized services.
- Uploading content to the blockchain and issuing NFTs.
- Generally worse user experience.
- Launching a coin and establishing a DAO under the guise of democracy.
Then, asking what business problems decentralized Web3 has solved, it feels like it solved the problem of founders making money by issuing coins.
Traditional innovators like to say "fake it till you make it". In the case of Web3, it's more like, "fake it till you make a token and sell them all".
Heaven is Full of Wonderful Works, Hell is Full of Grand Visions
Recently, while chatting with a friend, we discussed how difficult it is for Web3 products to acquire customers. Even for projects like Planetable that are genuinely trying to create a product, the user base is extremely sparse. On the other hand, projects resembling Ponzi schemes seem to attract more attention.
This is a mismatch of user groups. The audience within the cryptocurrency circle is not a holographic version of internet users. Most cryptocurrency enthusiasts are very willing to accept token airdrops from Web3 projects but are very reluctant to engage with the projects themselves.
This means that, as innovators, if your project doesn't offer substantial product value or operate as a Ponzi scheme, cryptocurrency enthusiasts won't give it a second glance simply because it carries a Web3 label.
The result is:
- For those who follow their hearts, hold a reverence for freedom and ideals, and seriously develop products, they not only have to work within a small market (cryptocurrencies) but also face the high entry barrier it inherently has (the need for a wallet).
- For those who follow the market with the primary goal of making money and seriously engage in Ponzi schemes, the product itself is irrelevant; what's important is that the financial operations gain market recognition.
From the perspective of successfully running a Ponzi scheme, a rising coin is a good coin (aka finance needs a good story). But from the perspective of making a good product, this leads to a situation where bad money drives out good.
So, in the entire Web3 market, we can only see grand visions but rarely see wonderful works (or they might be forced to exit)—thus, the Web3 market is hell.
The Dilemma of Innovation Decay
Besides the market itself, another problem faced by innovators in the Web3 domain is the decay of innovation levels, meaning that innovation itself is becoming uninteresting. Of course, this is a trend that follows all technological advancements, be it mobile internet, AI, or blockchain.
For example, with blockchain:
- Bitcoin: A simple technology implemented a decentralized financial system, and a simple choice of human nature implemented decentralized governance logic.
- Ethereum: Complex technology implemented a Turing-complete decentralized virtual machine.
- Web3: Assembling a low-end version of an existing product. Because the future is presumed to belong to blockchain, where everyone has coins, there's a need for blockchain-native XX. Just as Tiktok showcases your beautiful life, Web3 showcases your expensive digital little pictures.
These three levels of innovation are decreasingly impactful, from eternal to forever healthy, to just somewhat healthy. This means the levels of innovation are becoming increasingly trivial.
Of course, the level of innovation does not strongly correlate with commercial success. A project focusing on lending can easily be valued at 4 billion USD and then be called a blockchain innovation. P2P lenders would laugh their heads off at this.
But in any case, whether it's Web3 or blockchain, the innovations by newcomers are rapidly becoming uninteresting. Last year, friends from top companies left their jobs to work on Web3 because traditional internet was no longer cool — but I feel Web3 and blockchain are quickly losing their coolness too.
It's like traveling. Welcome from a place you find boring to a place I find boring.
What Kind of Web3 Do We Actually Need?
Last month, I debated with ChatGPT about where the application scenarios for Web3 are. Despite ChatGPT's efforts to highlight the benefits of Web3, I refuted them all, and it had to admit that most businesses don't need Web3 and blockchain.
Although the ideal is plump, the reality of Web3 product DAUs is very skinny. Most businesses simply do not need Web3 and blockchain. We shouldn't be designing problems just to solve them, like building socialism. For example, those working on Web3 social networks, if they still need to poach users
From Twitter, then it seems their social product isn't doing well.
Firstly, I think, since we're working on Web3 with at least some ideals in mind, we shouldn't expect to gain widespread recognition quickly. Be prepared for a long time where what you're working on is considered a toy by the market—after all, for a long time, Bitcoin was also considered a toy. Since we're dissatisfied with big companies and centralized institutions, let's embrace being "those who do not conform". When someone is searching for "Zion", you can tell them "Zion" is with you, and ask them whether they choose the blue pill or the red pill.
AI has the same problem, which I'll write about if I get a chance.
Secondly, we need to consider what kind of products are useful to ordinary people, not just to the "crypto circle". If we believe blockchain can change people's lives, then let's truly change people's lives by creating something everyone needs.
This goes back to the first principles of product design: whatever you make must at least meet one of these two criteria: be interesting or be useful. Many say Bitcoin, even after more than a decade, is still a toy. But at least a toy is interesting. Many current Web3 products can't even claim to be interesting.
The People's Choice
By the way, there's a simple test to determine if a Web3 project is reliable: if it requires you to buy its coin to use it, then the likelihood of it being unreliable greatly increases.
As one of the innovators in Web3, I hope what we do can become one of the people's choices. So, I also want to be like Trinity and Morpheus from The Matrix, looking for potential allies. Conversely, if people ever doubt the Matrix (aka big companies, centralized institutions, and organizations) and seek true freedom, remember that Web3 and blockchain exist.
