Our Common Enemy: The Controllers of Data Flow

In the age of information, the ethos of Web3—a decentralized internet that champions user ownership, privacy, and freedom—aligns closely with the principles of a small federal government, less regulation, and robust freedom of speech. These values are critical for fostering innovation, protecting individual rights, and ensuring a free and open society.

According to Chris Dixon, a partner at a16z and one of Web3’s foremost advocates and investors, Web3 is “the internet owned by the builders and users, orchestrated with tokens.”

A smaller federal government with limited powers is essential to promote economic growth and innovation. Excessive regulation stifles creativity and imposes unnecessary burdens on entrepreneurs, particularly in the rapidly evolving tech sector. Web3 technologies, which aim to decentralize power and give control back to users, thrive in environments where government interference is minimal. This fosters a culture of experimentation and competition, leading to more robust and user-centric innovations.

Freedom of speech is a cornerstone of democracy (or democratic republic) & a critical component of the Web3 ethos. In a decentralized internet, individuals should have the ability to express themselves freely without fear of censorship or retribution. This freedom encourages diverse viewpoints, fosters community engagement, and allows for the free exchange of ideas, which is essential for societal progress and innovation.

Has censored information changed your perspective in anyway?

In contrast to these principles, the Democratic Party in the United States has increasingly advocated for more governmental control and regulation. Policies promoting greater oversight and intervention in various sectors, including technology, can be seen as efforts to manage and influence the lives of citizens more directly. This approach often includes advocating for more stringent content regulations and controls that could impinge on freedom of speech. These pushes for more power can be seen from web3/crypto to environmental regulations, as well as surveillance and censorship via Big Tech companies.

Making the Democratic agenda appealing to the youth has long been one of the avenues through which the party advances evasive surveillance and over-reaching policies. The undertones of Marxism and Communism are once again in vogue on the coasts. To usher in these ideas and make them more palatable, a war of the classes must be waged. Through various forms of chaos and division, those who wish to separate and divide the public are able to create a ‘victim’ and an ‘oppressor.’ In America specifically, a whole generation has been subjected not only to financial division between the poor and wealthy but also to divisions based on skin color. This tactic complicates efforts to find reasonable solutions based on the merit system, which has been demonized in schools and the media.

Furthermore, token gating appears in industries like Hollywood, where the influence of the party is pervasive. Policies that are not in the public interest are made fashionable with the youth through movies, music, and, of course, the news media. This brings us to the next point:

The ideals of the Democratic Party are often introduced to the public in conjunction with efforts by the media and big tech companies. This collaboration creates a power structure that prioritizes convenience over privacy, undermining the principles of user control and freedom central to Web3. By convincing the public that convenience is paramount, these entities push an agenda that places individual privacy and freedom in the hands of a powerful few.

During the 2020 presidential election, there were instances where the government reportedly worked with social media platforms to manage and censor information.

(Old Twitter, and Meta/Facebook are some obvious examples of social media pushing stories known to be false, and prohibiting users from posting what turned out to be the truth ie - Hunter Biden Laptop, etc) This coordination aimed to control the narrative and protect the interests of the deep state, denying the people access to unfiltered truths. Such actions highlight the risks of centralized control over information, which is antithetical to the decentralized and open nature of Web3.

The media has significant power to shape public perception by controlling the flow of information. Selective reporting, framing of stories, and omission of key facts are tactics used to manipulate viewer perspectives. This controlled narrative often aligns with political agendas, further entrenching power structures that prioritize the interests of the few over the many.

As social media is now the new norm in how so many people receive or read about current events, this becomes more of a pressing issue. Do you feel the information you receive is manipulated to steer your perspective?

Big tech companies wield considerable influence in shaping legislation. They often lobby for laws that create barriers for smaller developers and decentralized projects, ensuring their dominance in the market. For instance, stringent data compliance regulations and patent controls can disproportionately affect smaller entities, making it difficult for innovative and decentralized Web3 projects to flourish.

Government and big tech companies often place more importance on the idea of convenience over privacy in a strange ploy to gain our data and monitor our movements. This trend sees the promotion of services that prioritize ease of use and seamless integration at the expense of individual privacy. Do some applications seem to be clever data collection mechanisms rather than assistants?

For instance, smart home devices and digital assistants collect vast amounts of personal data under the guise of convenience, creating a detailed profile of users' habits and preferences. This data is then utilized and monetized by these companies, often without the explicit consent of the user. Such practices undermine the fundamental right to privacy and highlight the need for more transparent and user-centric approaches that prioritize individual rights over corporate profits.

Recent Supreme Court decisions have paved the way for the government to work more closely with big tech to censor individuals under the guise of managing misinformation. This ruling allows the government to collaborate with social media companies to monitor and control the flow of information, further entrenching the power of a few large entities and undermining the principles of a free and open internet. This development is particularly concerning for advocates of Web3, who see it as a step back from the decentralization and user empowerment that the movement strives for. Even though there was a 6-3 ruling in favor of upholding the ability for government to assist social media in censorship, there was this notable pushback -- Justice Alito wrote the dissent, alleging that “for months, high-ranking government officials placed unrelenting pressure on Facebook to suppress Americans’ free speech”.

Alito argued that the court’s ruling provides “an attractive model for future officials who want to control what the people say, hear and think”.

The ability of the government to leverage big tech for censorship poses a significant threat to freedom of speech and the open exchange of ideas. By allowing such collaborations, there is a risk of creating an environment where dissenting voices are silenced and only approved narratives are allowed to flourish. This stands in stark contrast to the decentralized ethos of Web3, which seeks to democratize information and give control back to users.

By making people question what the truth really is, power brokers confuse and confound users by not allowing them to verify their own information. This scenario makes big tech and government the 'arbiter of truth,' which is dangerous for several reasons. It centralizes control over information, allowing those in power to manipulate narratives to serve their interests. This can lead to the suppression of dissenting voices and the propagation of biased or incomplete information. When users cannot independently verify facts, it undermines their ability to make informed decisions and erodes trust in institutions. This manipulation fosters a climate of confusion and dependency, where individuals are less likely to challenge authority or seek alternative viewpoints. Such a dynamic stifles critical thinking and undermines the democratic process, making it crucial to advocate for decentralized systems that empower users to verify information independently.

Web3 offers solutions to the issue of censorship through its decentralized architecture, which ensures that no single entity has control over information. Blockchain technology allows for immutable records, making it difficult for any authority to alter or censor data. Additionally, decentralized social media platforms, like Mastodon and Minds, give users control over their data and content, reducing the risk of censorship by centralized authorities. The community-driven approach in Web3 fosters a culture of transparency and trust, allowing users to verify information through consensus mechanisms rather than relying on centralized fact-checkers.

In the Web3 community, 'fake news' is addressed through decentralized verification processes and reputation systems. These systems leverage the collective judgment of the community to assess the credibility of information. For example, platforms like Truthcoin and Factom use blockchain to create tamper-proof records of information and its sources, allowing users to trace the origin and verify the authenticity of the data. By decentralizing the verification process, Web3 minimizes the risk of biased or politically motivated censorship, promoting a more open and trustworthy information ecosystem.

To counter the dominance of big tech, there is a need for courageous and principled developers and entrepreneurs to create businesses, applications, and services that directly compete with established giants. These innovators must prioritize user privacy, ownership, and transparency. Examples of this in the Web3 space include projects like Filecoin, which offers decentralized storage solutions, and Brave Browser, which focuses on privacy and user-first advertising models.

To foster a new age of user ownership and privacy, it is crucial to promote education and awareness about the importance of decentralized technologies. This includes developing educational programs, workshops, and resources that highlight the benefits of Web3 and the dangers of centralized control. Additionally, supporting grassroots movements and community-driven projects can help build a more informed and empowered user base.

This is alot to take in. Especially if you are skeptical of the validity of this article. That's a good instinct, stick with it. But rather than simply trusting me, I encourage you to do your own thorough research. Then, cross reference. The first step to taking your power back!

The core values of a small federal government, minimal regulation, and strong freedom of speech are integral to the success of Web3 and the broader digital economy. It all goes hand in hand. These principles ensure that power remains decentralized, innovation is unhindered, and individual rights are protected.

As one political party pushes for more governmental control, often supported by media and big tech, and collaborates with social media to manage information, it is crucial to advocate for policies that align with the foundational ethos of Web3. By supporting courageous developers and promoting education, we can foster a future that remains open, free, and innovative.