Prediction: MetaMask will add a messaging function. You already have an address book. You’re probably doing splits with them. Why go to Signal or wherever? Mutisigs will develop attached group discussion fora. Messaging companies may acquire wallet companies. Or vice versa.
Conversation
Your main transactional (but not custodial) wallet will be your identity/social, replacing email and phone number.
1
2
29
Venmo has already created a weird social network around Web2 payments. But Web3 is the natural home for the idea. On Venmo, it’s vaguely voyeuristic, like Glassdoor reviews. But on Web3 such things may have a healthier valence.
3
28
This is probably going to be the big ideological divide.
I think *decentralized* artificial digital scarcity is a great invention. Incentivizes production without empowering aggregators too much. I think aggregation theory will be weakened or reversed by Web3. twitter.com/MattAlhonte/st
This Tweet is unavailable.
3
1
44
A general pattern of question I’m getting as in every tech futures conversation I’ve ever had, is “How is Web3 thing X different from obvious analogical old thing Y?”
Anchoring on the most obvious analogy tends to minimize distinctions and magnify similarities.
1
3
34
The snark form of this is perversely self blinding, as in “X, you invented X”
“Rideshare with published routes”… “public transit you invented public transit” (treating app based failing as a rounding error).
Thing is *you choose your anchors, you choose your blindness*
1
1
41
This is why I don’t engage “how is it different from X” whether motivated by sincere curiosity or bad-faith trolling.
You chose your anchor. I don’t have to. I may offer alternate anchors, but I don’t have to correct the invisibilities of your frame. That’s a futile battle.
2
2
53
In general, I try to understand a thing on its own terms. You can never avoid metaphors (unpopular opinion: there is no System 2; there is no ‘first principles thinking’, there’s only conceptual metaphors too subtle to notice), but you can pick one that highlight the differences.
4
3
51
Replying to
you can't call something drm and then say talking about copyright is "anchoring" against an outdated metaphor; you're the one you used the metaphor, presumably for a descriptive purpose
2
Replying to
I was responding to a class of comments I’ve been getting, not to yours in particular. But yeah, I used DRM as a convenient pointer but it’s not synonymous with copyright to me. To me the essence of it is encryption. Managing access to bits with encryption = drm.
2
1
Simply by encrypting a document and not sharing keys I’m asserting and managing digital rights, regardless of whether big companies or governments or copyright regimes even exist
Replying to
I actually don't think you can control access to information even with web3 drm, you can just make participation in certain systems conditional on some transaction
the problem is that, as those systems grow in importance, so does the penalty of non-ownership
1
1

