[fumplethumb]

This is an interesting comment because I disagree completely. Web3’s binding of economics and technology is _exactly_ what makes it compelling.

Free versions of things are often impractical. Good things take time and effort. How many users host their own email servers or have their own mastodon instance for example? Most people prefer to pay (in fees or in ad attention) for premium versions of these services that are built/maintained by private companies in a closed/centralized manner.

At its best, Web3’s marriage of economics and technology allows for a hybrid model where people pay for premium versions of these products built by people/companies in an open manner. The closed vs. open is key here. Without Web3 you can build something open/decentralized for free or something closed/centralized for profit. Web3 allows building services that are open/for profit.

Imagine the power of capitalism harnessed by open projects. Maybe I’m crazy, but that’s what excites me about Web3.

[etchalon]

Free versions of things are what has made current internet culture possible.

And nothing is stopping anyone, today, from building open things, while making money.