Polis:AI and Web3

Vote for all and you can post your new opinion.

https://gyazo.com/dece76fb96d70f7758e9f03db0668c35

https://gyazo.com/697d1e05eec20d4e5cc8d354387f872e

https://gyazo.com/dac1b70c525984646267e9181af1bcc0

https://gyazo.com/0684bc43b4e35c71ec01cbe8ac2636f2

https://gyazo.com/fdb251a6fdde36c1df0f196a4e88206f

https://gyazo.com/575e7bef1de485aaf327372505461d24

https://gyazo.com/fd157f8ebaf1138159fa78c26d94b57d

https://gyazo.com/a7025df4bc9ad11e5f3a0d11964436ab

https://gyazo.com/9b6149aee7c30c75d29c82ccd5f005f1

impetus

Web 2.0 was important because "Internet content was transformed by user contributions.

Web 1.0 was a time when only the media and a few people were sending out information, Web 2.0 has brought a lot of people to contribute.

Content contribution by users is difficult if users do not have creative skills

Twitter allowed users to participate even if their creative skills were low because of the low character count text

Instagram has gone viral because even people who are not good at photography can make it look good!

TikTok went viral because it was easier to post videos that looked good compared to YouTube, etc.

In Web 2.0, the flow of "easier posting -> users post -> vastly different content than before" has happened many times

In Web3, data can be owned by blockchain

In Web3, the incentive revolution has brought significant financial benefits not only to the platformer, but also to the content contributor.

Twitter and Instagram are strange because user posts are content, but the platform takes all the revenue from that content.

Better service can be created by successfully returning profits to the users who contribute content.

The impact of generative AI has been a decline in the skill level required for content creation.

Generative AI has lowered the cost of content submission, which has a significant impact on current Web 2.0 companies.

Whether to call Web 2.0, which has been greatly influenced by generative AI, Web 3 is merely a matter of nomenclature and not essential

Blockchain and others are web4 (or later)

In the web 1.0 era, the majority of web content was mainly media or corporate content that could not be created by the general public, whereas in the web 2.0 era, content that can be disseminated by anyone has become the main focus through SNS and other means.

There was more to "write" in read/write/own. Most of the datasets of the generative AI were created by web2.0, and further "write" (content generation) by the generative AI will be performed based on these datasets.

In the past, web 1.0 was newspapers and portals.

Web 2.0 is the Internet becoming more interactive and user-driven

The Internet as we see it today is Web 2.0. (Web 2.0 allows users to create and share their own content; UGC stands for "User Generated Content," meaning content generated by users; YouTube and TikTok are classic examples of UGC, platforms where users can upload videos and share them with others).

The Internet will be "something that views content created by generative AI. This is web 3.0.

The change from Web 1.0 to Web 3.0 has mainly been a change in the originators of content: In Web 1.0, corporations were primarily responsible for writing (WRITE) content. On the other hand, in Web 2.0, individuals began to write (WRITE) content, and user-generated content increased. In Web 3.0, AI is expected to play the role of writing content, and it is believed that a more advanced Internet environment will be formed.

The difference between the mass media and the Internet age lies in the diversification and increase in the scale of the entities that transmit information. As the Internet has developed, not only individuals and corporations, but also generative AIs (AIs that automatically generate content) have emerged as information transmitters. This is part of the evolution of the Internet.

The theme of "ownership" continues to be an important issue for Web 4.0 and beyond. Issues such as ownership of digital assets and content, privacy, and data security will continue to require solutions as the Internet develops.

Both "Web3 is wacky" and "Web3 is AI" describe the "ill-timed hype cycle" from different perspectives: Web3 looks like wacky because we are looking at the peak of a fad; Web3 looks like AI because we are looking at a future where both are connected.

The overly lifted portion of Web3 will face a period of disillusionment in the future.

The AI at the moment is also over-hyped, so we'll see a period of disillusionment a little further down the road.

In the years to come, a better future will be realized by combining the best half of Web3 and AI technologies.

The problem is that people who have raised their fists emotionally against Web3 at this time will curse themselves by their actions and resist social change 10 years from now.

It is best to rename beneficial Web3-derived technologies so that they are not known to be Web3-derived technologies. This avoids emotional backlash.

Web3 is part of a long-standing initiative, "Does Dispersion Dream of Equality?

The breakthrough of Web3 was that it was closely tied to money, and it provided a solution to the problem of "who is going to maintain the infrastructure? who is going to maintain the infrastructure?

Web3 and others have gained worldwide momentum because they are the antithesis of the concern that "big tech is exploiting our data".

Japan is just idyllic, and there has always been criticism that "big tech is exploiting our data". Bluesky, the distributed social networking service, and GDPR and everything else is all connected to that.

The NFT and other "reward creators rightly" stuff is a bonus, or a sideline in terms of the data exploitation issue.

The main stream of Web3 is the whole data, including personal information, cookie issues, and so on.

Web3 and AI are connected to the ground in terms of personal information and data. The current situation is that the original owners of the data are being exploited by big tech with AI without their knowledge.

Italy has banned the use of OpenAI and it could be a violation of GDPR.

Data is already becoming a scarce resource, like oil. Like oil, grain, silicon, and data.

The problem is that AI makes data increasingly important, yet little is given back to the users who are generating personal information and works of authorship.

The cut-off point for considering the return of data to the users who generate it is the Web3

The democratization of data began with web 2.0, when users started putting their data online.

Web 2.0 has users putting data up on the net, AI is learning that data, and Web 3 is about who owns the data, which are two sides of the same coin

We wanted Web3 to be "a technology that enables proactive control of data," but it hasn't yet stood up.

Web3 is, in effect, financial anarchism.

Some open source software brings value to many people but is not returned to its authors. For these digital public goods, Gitcoin has distributed over $6 billion using Web3 technology. This is a change for the better in society.

Web3-derived distributed identity technology reduces physical bodily danger and enables people to operate safely online in areas where government opposition to democratic movements is strong. It is a technology that can change society for the better.

Taiwan Digital Minister Audrey Tan positions Web3-derived distributed ID technology as bringing digital human rights. We agree with this interpretation.

I will explain this!

First of all, Web 2.0 simply means

"Internet content has been transformed by user contributions."

I think that was important.

I mean, from the days when only the media or a few people sent out information (Web 1.0), many people started to contribute.

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FtzWMP2akAAA3pk?format=jpg&name=medium#.png

On the other hand, it's hard to find content that users can contribute without creative ability.

So, the early excitement was text-based. Twitter, for example, was relatively easy to post because it was only text. It was also easy to do, because it required less text.

Instagram, which became popular after that, also became popular because of its ability to make photos look good. The filter function and the square presentation in the early days made it possible even for people who were not good at photography to make their photos look good.

Likewise, TikTok has been very significant in making it easier to post videos that look good compared to YouTube and other sites.

So, in Web 2.0,

Easier to post

>> User submits

>> vastly different content than before

So the process happened many times.

So, what is Web3? When it comes to,

- Data can be owned by the blockchain

- The incentive revolution will bring significant financial benefits not only to platformers, but also to content contributors

Isn't that the same kind of worldview? It was said.

For example, Twitter and Instagram only have content from our posts, but the platform is taking all the revenue! Strange! Or, "We can create a better service by giving back to the users as well. It's a way of thinking.

In such a situation, generative AI is all the rage.

The Impact of Generative AI

"All kinds of content creation, whether it's text, illustrations, or programming, can now be submitted even if you're not very skilled."

This is the point.

Right now, illustrations and the like are the biggest, but in the near future, it is expected to expand to include video, animation, manga, apps, and web services.

I imagine that the revolution that Twitter, Instagram, and TikTok have accomplished in their respective fields is now taking place on an all-encompassing and massive scale.

For example, it used to be difficult for an artist to become popular by posting illustrations on pixiv, but now it is possible to post high quality pictures.

The same way that Instagram has made it possible for anyone to take a good photo through filters.

In that sense, these are more advanced Web 2.0.

It's up to you. Everyone will have a good discussion, and it will be settled. It is relatively unimportant.

So, we're talking about, "How are the forms of Web services changing?" and so we are talking about making a distinction, and is it Web 2.0 or Web 3? is about clarity and people's changing modes, so I don't think it's necessary to make such a strict distinction, though,

Web3 was AI! is the above background.

Then!

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Ft0ebtfaUAEs9-A?format=jpg&name=medium#.png

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FtzWMP2akAAA3pk?format=jpg&name=medium#.png

I will explain this!

First of all, Web 2.0 simply means

"Internet content has been transformed by user contributions."

I think that was important.

I mean, from the days when only the media or a few people sent out information (Web 1.0), many people started to contribute.

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FtzWMP2akAAA3pk?format=jpg&name=medium#.png

Feb 24 -.

The recent generative AI shows that blockchain, etc. were web4 (and beyond) and the real web3 was generative AI.

What is web2.0?

In the web 1.0 era, most web content was mainly media or corporate content that could not be created by the general public, whereas in the web 2.0 era, content that can be transmitted by anyone has become the main focus through social networking and other means.

In this vein, web3 is more a standard trend of further content expansion, > although read/write/own was an excellent rhetoric,

"write" still had a long way to go, I guess.

In other words, most of the generative AI datasets are created by web2.0, which will be used as a basis for further "write" (content generation) by the generative AI.

What this means is that the Internet we see today is youtube, and if it is tiktok, it is GCM, or web 2.0. The Internet is now web 2.0. In the past, web 1.0 was newspapers and portals.

This means that in 10 years time (figurative expression), most of us will only be watching content created by generative AI,

For most users, the Internet will be "something to watch content created by generative AI. This is web 3.0. (However, web 1.0 has not disappeared, and web 2.0 still exists).

Instead of read/write/own, the change in the transmission entity of write, corporate (web1)/individual (web2)/AI (web3), was the change from web1.0-3.0.

The theme of "own" was carried over to web4 and beyond.

What was groundbreaking this time was that it was so closely linked to money that it provided a solution to the problem of "who is going to maintain the infrastructure? This was a breakthrough because it was closely linked to money.

In fact, such criticism has been there for a long time. The same goes for Bluesky, the distributed SNS, GDPR, and everything else is connected to that. Japan is just idyllic.

The main stream is the whole data, including personal information and cookie issues.

"The original owners of the data are being exploited by big tech with AI without their knowledge." So there are claims that there is no problem with "open data" or fair use or whatever, but I'm talking about gross.

Italy has banned the use of OpenAI and it could be a GDPR violation. Data is already becoming a scarce resource, like oil. Like oil, grain, silicon, and data.

Data is becoming increasingly important with AI. On the other hand, little is given back to the users who are generating personal information and works (although there is talk of using it for free).

Web3 is the antithesis of this place.

Two sides of the same coin, but we're talking about different layers.

In effect, it's something that embodies financial anarchism!

---