At the ETHCC 2024 side event, Web3 Social Day, a panel discussion titled “Decentralized Social vs Web3 Social” took center stage. Organized by Mask Network, Lens Protocol, and SendingMe, the event on July 9th brought together leading figures in decentralized social platforms to discuss their distinct approaches and the challenges they face.

Executive Summary

The panel highlighted the importance of censorship-resistant data storage, user data ownership, and the need for interoperability to avoid centralization. While decentralized social networks are still in their infancy, there is optimism for significant growth and adoption in the coming years. The discussions underscored the necessity of building robust infrastructure and user-friendly applications to drive the next phase of Web3 social evolution.

Key Takeaways from the Panel Discussion

Background of Protocols and Products, and the Impact of VC Backing

Suji Yan, founder of Mask Network, moderated the discussion and introduced the background of each protocol and application. Nostr, created by Fiatjaf, is notable for receiving donations from Jack Dorsey and other key Bitcoin contributors. Codex focuses on building a data storage network emphasizing data durability, censorship resistance, and privacy. Limone.eth discussed his work on Farcaster, an app built on a protocol he admires despite its VC backing. Sending.me, an all-in-one messenger supporting Ethereum and Bitcoin networks, aims to create a platform immune to centralization constraints.

Core Problems Addressed by Decentralized Social Platforms

The panelists addressed the fundamental issues their platforms aim to solve. Codex emphasized the necessity of censorship-resistant data storage for decentralized applications. Shane Gaffney from Sending.me stressed the importance of user data ownership, arguing against both government and corporate exploitation of personal data. Users should have control over their data and the choice to monetize it if they wish.

Handling Government Regulation and Service Provider Interference

Addressing the challenge of potential government regulation and service provider interference, the panelists provided a variety of perspectives. Limone.eth suggested accepting compromises while ensuring that critical communication nodes can operate independently if mainstream services are disrupted. Fiatjaf of Nostr argued that striving for absolute content availability leads to a controlled environment contrary to decentralization principles. Instead, Nostr focuses on avoiding centralized control. Wouter Constant discussed the need for interoperability rather than creating a centralized global state. He pointed out that complex protocols could inadvertently lead to centralization by making it difficult for multiple parties to implement them independently.

User Base and Infrastructure Development in Decentralized Social Apps

The discussion also touched on the user base of decentralized social apps. Eric from Codex highlighted the misconception that data stored on IPFS is inherently permanent, stressing the need for incentives to maintain data. Limone.eth observed that while many are building infrastructure, the focus should shift to simple applications that attract users. Starting with end-user applications can guide the development of practical infrastructure. Shane Gaffney emphasized the importance of seamless and accessible applications. The functionality and user experience of decentralized apps should be prioritized to ensure broader adoption. Wouter Constant cautioned against the complexity of protocols, which can lead to a single party dominating implementation. Simplicity is essential to maintain true openness and decentralization.

Current Stage of Decentralized and Web3 Social Networks

The panelists assessed the current stage of decentralized and Web3 social networks on a scale from 1 to 10. Wouter Constant rated it as 1, emphasizing that we are at the beginning of a significant paradigm shift. Integrating public-private keys into society will take generations. Eric suggested a rating of 2 or 3, noting that substantial investment and infrastructure development are needed to accelerate progress. Once the core layers are established, development will likely speed up exponentially. Limone.eth rated adoption as 1 or 2 but acknowledged technological advancements at a 3 or 4. He anticipates more inspiration and motivation to build on existing protocols. Shane Gaffney agreed, rating it 3 or 4. He predicted significant growth over the next decade and expected a much higher rating five years from now.

For more information, visit the original source on Mask Network.

Image source: Shutterstock