A lot of web3 advocacy became easier for me to understand once I realized most advocates aren’t technologists.
The most ardent advocates are people who treat making money as a signal of value (e.g. VCs, early adopters, grifters, etc) who view the tech as Star Trek technobabble.
The most ardent advocates are people who treat making money as a signal of value (e.g. VCs, early adopters, grifters, etc) who view the tech as Star Trek technobabble.
I approached web3 from the perspective of how can this create value for a company with millions of users or enhance a product making millions of dollars. And that turns out to be the wrong question.
The right question is how do I turn FOMO into money? That’s the core of crypto.
The right question is how do I turn FOMO into money? That’s the core of crypto.
In contrast, with Web 2.0 it was straightforward to discuss how one enhanced value of a 1M+ user or $1M+ product by adding incorporating JavaScript, inline updates without refreshing and enabling users to create content instead of primarily consuming it.
Web3 is just mint tokens
Web3 is just mint tokens
Web3 advocates today denigrate Web 2.0 by associating it with the success of Google & Facebook. In reality, the core idea of Web 2.0 was that you can make the web interactive and those companies won.
Core idea of web3 is you should sell tokens and Coinbase & OpenSea are winning.
Core idea of web3 is you should sell tokens and Coinbase & OpenSea are winning.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
