The reason that so many people use the same websites (like Google’s, Facebook’s, etc) is mainly because of the convenience these sites offer and the reach they

The reason that so many people use the same websites (like Google’s, Facebook’s, etc) is mainly because of the convenience these sites offer and the reach they can provide. If this is a problem, it’s not a technical problem, but an economic one. The big companies have more design and programming capacity to offer online services than individuals and non-profit open source projects do right now. Is a lack of viable open source alternatives to Big Tech an economic problem only? Consider how quickly the Web itself disrupted the centralized networks of the day: AOL, MSN, CompuServe, Prodigy, … Consider how quickly VOIP collapsed the cost of telecommunications what the government for 50 years — with its regulations and breaking up monopolies — did not. Today we all take that for granted. Yes, tech that eliminates gatekeepers (switchboard operators, anyone? magazines, newspapers, radio…) brings costs toward zero and enables far more wealth creation than “privately owned” networks and infra. It creates far more of a free market, too, for those who like free markets. Web3 is far better than Web2 for all this. Does Blockchain suck for web scale things? Yes. But there are many other distributed systems. To me, “blockchain” isn’t essential to Web3. What is essential is “smart contracts” — or more generally — code that for the first time you can trust to do what it says. And who can vet it? A free market of worldwide experts that you can collectively trust. Just as Web 2 allowed anyone to deploy an HTTP website and anyome in the world could interact with it, similarly Web 3 allows doing that with growing numbers of real world applications like this: https://intercoin.org/applications https://intercoin.org/applications