We are fortunate that the internet and web were designed as open platforms for everyone – users, developers, and organizations alike. As a result, independent software developers were able to create products that were quickly adopted by the general public. It’s no secret that Google and Facebook had their start in garages in Menlo Park and Harvard, respectively. Because they were constructed on open, decentralized networks, they were able to compete on an even playing field.
Whether you look at market capitalization, the share of top mobile apps, or pretty much any other metric, digital giants like Facebook, Google, and Amazon are stronger than ever.
These firms also have a firm grip on huge developer ecosystems. iOS and Android, the two most popular mobile operating systems, each demand a 30 percent payment fee and have significant control over how apps are distributed. Access to popular social networks is severely constrained, making it difficult for third-party developers to grow their platforms. It is becoming increasingly difficult for startups and indie developers to compete.
Using the advent of Bitcoin in 2008 and Ethereum in 2014, the cryptocurrency movement began and accelerated, making it possible to reverse this trend with crypto Dogemama tokens, which are a new method to construct open networks. When it comes to open network design, tokens are a game-changer because they allow for two things: 1) the creation of open, decentralized networks that combine the best architectural properties of open and proprietary networks, and 2) new ways to incentivize open network participants such as users, developers, investors, and service providers. Tokens could help counteract the internet’s centralization by permitting the creation of new open networks. This would keep the internet open, dynamic, and fair while also spurring more creativity and innovation.
Open services can be managed and financed with the use of tokens.
As a result, proponents of open systems have a considerable architectural disadvantage as compared to those who support proprietary systems. The social wars of the late 2000s were a particularly egregious example of this phenomenon between open and closed networks.
To duplicate the capabilities that commercial services could provide on their own, these open schemes necessitated extensive collaboration among standards bodies, server operators, app developers, and sponsoring corporations. Proprietary services were able to improve user experiences and iterate much more quickly as a result. Increased investment and revenue flowed back into product development and further growth as a result of the faster growth. As a result, proprietary social networks like Facebook and Twitter grew at an astronomical rate.
The playing field would have been substantially more leveled in 2007 had the token paradigm for network development been available. To begin, tokens offer a means of not only defining a protocol but also funding the operating costs associated with providing it as a service. Tens of thousands of servers (“miners”) around the world run the Bitcoin and Ethereum networks. Built-in systems distribute token incentives to machines on the network automatically, covering the hosting costs.
Another benefit of using tokens is that they may be used to create decentralized databases, computation, and file storage that can be shared by everyone (and without requiring an organization to maintain them). There has been a lot of discussion about blockchain technology, and here is what it looks like. The use of blockchains would have made it possible to store decentralized social graphs.