Web 3.0 Is The Fragmentation Of Everything

It was so long ago, most of us do not even remember the days of a decentralized Internet.

Over the last 30 years, the Internet became an epicenter of centralized control. In the West, we have the entire spectrum covered by around 20 companies. These are mostly household names although a few are unknown to the average person. Those companies tend to be more towards the infrastructure end of things, meaning people utilize it without realizing.

This is all going to change. In fact, we are starting to see this with Web 2.0.

image generated by Ideogram

Web 3.0 Is Fragmentation

If you are reading this article, you are on Web 3.0. The data is housed on a decentralized, permissionless database. This is not a Wordpress blog nor is it a mainstream media site.

It is one minor example of a shift that is taking place. Each person who reads this article, or one stored on the same database, is aiding in the fragmentation. Ultimately, this comes down to a splitting of attention. In other words, where our focus is residing changes.

Media is seeing a huge push in this direction. It started more than 20 years ago with the altering of the distribution channels. With the rise of YouTube, now the most viewed streaming service, eyeballs started to move elsewhere.

Of course, Google is a company that is both doing some disrupting yet seeing parts of its business disrupted. YouTube is going to face a lot of challenges.

This is not the limit to what is taking place.

All areas of life that Web 3.0 touches means fragmentation. Naturally, it is inherent in the concept of decentralization.

Finance is another area that is going to face massive challenges, at least from the centralized perspective. We are seeing some of the early signs of what happens when people can create their own money. This will extend as a host of decentralized financial services are developed. digital wallets bring an entirely new element to the table, making the need for banks as storage devices obsolete.

A New Mindset

We are accustomed to watching a world where the winners take most.

Who is going to be the next multi-trillion dollar company? That is what people are looking for. While that is a valid path to pursue for a while, it is not the ultimate outcome.

Technology is going to make this entire scenario fade away. Instead, we are going to see millions (billions) of entities worth a few million dollars. It is a process that will be aided by artificial intelligence.

Sam Altman, along with others, stated that we are going to see 1 person, $1 billion companies.

What do you think that does to the landscape in the future?

We could state that these will be rare. However, if we work our way down, how many $100 million companies are built by one person? $50M? $10M? $1M?

The point here is we are going to see this fragmented to such a degree that centralization is overwhelmed.

Consider the idea that anyone can create an application. If AI gets to the point where the basics of coding are autonomous and available to anyone, then we could see digital platforms popping up everywhere. Here is where the attention enters. With each being its own economy, there could be thousands of "citizens", each contributing. It could easily make the platform worth a couple million dollars.

Even LLMs are going to be fragmented.

At the moment, cost means that we are stuck with Big Tech dominating. However, what happens when a Llama2 can be trained for $10,000? That opens up a host of different possibilities, with many entities creating their own models. This is not even mentioning the virtual clients that will end up being tied to them.

Let us take an easy example:

How many version of Windows are there? We have one that is being sold along with a handful still supported. If we look at Linux, there are over 600 forms distributed, an estimate of course. This is what happens when the Linux code is open.

Transaction-By-Transaction

Data is the food of the future. This is a result of the commodity becoming compute. The former has to feed the latter.

The shift from Web 2.0 is a transaction-by-transaction situation. In other words, we can focus upon the minute and see how, over time, it builds.

Again, most are accustomed to major shifts. I think it unfolds in a much different manner. The creation of complex organisms is evolutionary. This means the reverse is also.

Going back to the media, the legacy is mission millions of hours of viewing each year. This did not leave all at once. Instead, it took place in 1 minute increments, as people watched videos on other platforms.

When it is all added up at the end of the year, that amounts to some major traffic.

The same is true with finance. Each payment made utilizing a stablecoin as opposed to the banking system, that is another dollar (or whatever the measurement) removed. The same premise holds true.

A concept I work from is tentacles. These can extend in many different directions, often not resulting in much to start. That said, as more people follow some of the paths, impact is made.

Over the last year I discussed how the biggest missing piece for Web 3.0 is services. While some of this is excused since we are still waiting on infrastructure, that is where things will really start to change.

As people are able to serve more of their needs using Web 3.0 services, they are incentivized to do so.

This is something that is going to fragment attention to a great degree. It is also something the centralized world is not ready for.

---

What Is Hive

Posted Using InLeo Alpha