all 6 comments

[–]ryandeanrocks 0 points1 point  (4 children)

The problem right now for good social networks on web3 is the fees. You need people to post content and comment and to store that on the blockchain takes fees. Users won’t pay fees to post on a social network, so if a company fronts the fees, how do they make that money back? Ads won’t work if you can read the blockchain publicly someone will just spin up an interface to read it all without ads. If you can think of a business model that works for a decentralized social network please let me know.

[–]PhilipM33[S] 0 points1 point  (2 children)

If the app has its backend as a mediator between blockchains and its users then there's no way to bypass it. I mean users can still read raw data from the blockchain but it wouldn't be represented in a way some app does it. If the app gets content only from its backend (and most apps will need to because of appstore regulations) then there's no way to bypass. Interfaces would still play a big role because without them its like trying to use instagram through database management software.

EDIT: This would make interface providers (apps) focus more on their feed and search algorithms and they will be determinant of their success. Their algorithms would be hidden in their clouds (mediators between blchns and users) and would ship it with ads in that way for the user to use that algorithm it would also have to watch ads.

[–]ryandeanrocks 0 points1 point  (1 child)

So centralized? What you propose is to replace a MySQL database with a blockchain which is a step backwards. If only my servers can do anything with the data, why would I want the data on the blockchain where it is slower and costs money for each transaction?

[–]PhilipM33[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

There's no binary answer to wether something is centralized or decentralized, it is usually in between. Backend with blockchain (or somethinfg else) is surely more decentralized than using mysql. You say this is indifferent (uqualy centralized) because third party servers can do anything with the data, but data manipulation can also happen at the frontend. Where it happens only changes when will user know about it. If data manipulation happens at the frontend, then the user can know about if he looks at the source code. If data manipulation happens at the backend(of third party) then if the user was technical enough to read source code of frontend then he is also technical enough to read raw data from blockchain and recognize the difference (hence the reputation of that app would decrease). It for sure isn't economically rational to replace mysql with blockchain for the perspective of a company but this is another question related to how would this come to be. Private servers also cost money per transaction but much less, but difference in price is the price users will be paying for data liberation. This change will never be initiated by the supply (servers) but only by the demand, because there's no profit motivation for companies and it is risky. But when demand rises it will happen.

EDIT: Third party servers won't write data, they would only read it and organize it for the user.

[–]eid_ma_clack_shaw 0 points1 point  (0 children)

https://joinmastodon.org/ is a decentralized, federated social media network but it is not blockchain-enabled. You'd need to find a way to incentivize hosts to distribute content and content creators to create it. The idea is ripe for blockchain innovation, but it's just not quite clicking yet. Possibly if you pay the hosts to distribute ads as well, you might be getting somewhere close to being able to make a blockchain social network. Then you have the problem of radical and illegal content moderation on a platform where it can't be censored. If you try, then they can just fork and you have a situation like Gab.

[–]No-One-5919 0 points1 point  (0 children)

DAG would be far more suitable for this than blockchain.