Talks about how the web has lacked decentralized identity protocols at its base layer and how they are evolving. Can be a great reference for the Bluesky identity use case task.

"Our community believes in first principles thinking, meaning we originated all our own algorithms through socratic dialogue. We then test it at scale using code to see if we are right. We have found that the least wrong algorithms were designed by imagining how ten billion people might coordinate themselves if they were to perform the same job as the internet itself."
The new web needs to focus human-specific problems that were not that obvious at the time of the internet's tech focused creation -
The impact of misinformation on the real world at societal and government levels.
Whether there is a fair distribution of attention for all groups, including the underrepresented.
How to reduce isolating effects that lead to tribal fragmentation and broken discourse.
Our goal is not to tell people what to think, but to provide tools that empower free thinking. The theory is that non-violent ideas independently form prosocial consensus over time[1][2][3] and therefore out-survive violent content which has a tendency to be reactionary and authoritarian.

Didn't understand the part about Search result rankings and badges and mechanism to give users a way to stay away from echo chambers by the tracing degrees of separation. Worth revisiting.

Looks superrr interesting, I don't get what's happening but I want to, this might break the future.

To check later - Golem for performing computations, filecoin for decentralized file storage.
The argument is that from 1980s-2000s people were using a lot of community built open source protocols, but post 2000s FAAG came up and OS protocols couldn't keep pace. The advantage was access to internet to millions with compromised control, trust and privacy.
He says this discouraged innovation as people started to think things were out of their control - I understand why, but can't intuitively see that link so strongly as to place the onus upon it. " Centralization has also created broader societal tensions, which we see in the debates over subjects like fake news, state sponsored bots, “no platforming” of users, EU privacy laws, and algorithmic biases." - Again can't see the link between centralization and most of these, especially fake news - why will it propagate less on a decentralized platform?
Let’s look at the problems with centralized platforms. Centralized platforms follow a predictable life cycle. When they start out, they do everything they can to recruit users and 3rd-party complements like developers, businesses, and media organizations. They do this to make their services more valuable, as platforms (by definition) are systems with multi-sided network effects. As platforms move up the adoption S-curve, their power over users and 3rd parties steadily grows. When they hit the top of the S-curve, their relationships with network participants change from positive-sum to zero-sum. The easiest way to continue growing lies in extracting data from users and competing with complements over audiences and profits.
Cryptonetworks - Cryptonetworks are networks built on top of the internet that 1) use consensus mechanisms such as blockchains to maintain and update state, 2) use cryptocurrencies (coins/tokens) to incentivize consensus participants (miners/validators) and other network participants. Some cryptonetworks, such as Ethereum, are general programming platforms that can be used for almost any purpose. Other cryptonetworks are special purpose, for example Bitcoin is intended primarily for storing value, Golem for performing computations, and Filecoin for decentralized file storage.
Cryptonetworks use multiple mechanisms to ensure that they stay neutral as they grow, preventing the bait-and-switch of centralized platforms. First, the contract between cryptonetworks and their participants is enforced in open source code. Second, they are kept in check through mechanisms for “voice” and “exit.” Participants are given voice through community governance, both “on chain” (via the protocol) and “off chain” (via the social structures around the protocol). Participants can exit either by leaving the network and selling their coins, or in the extreme case by forking the protocol - this ends up aligning network participants to work together towards a common goal - growth of the network and appreciation of the token.
Today’s cryptonetworks suffer from limitations that keep them from seriously challenging centralized incumbents. The most severe limitations are around performance and scalability. The next few years will be about fixing these limitations and building networks that form the infrastructure layer of the crypto stack. After that, most of the energy will turn to building applications on top of that infrastructure.
Why Chris thinks decentralization will win?
- Decentralized networks can win the third era of internet for the same reason they won the first era : by winning the hearts and minds of entrepreneurs and developers. In the case of cryptonetworks, there are multiple, compounding feedback loops involving developers of the core protocol, developers of complementary cryptonetworks, developers of 3rd party applications, and service providers who operate the network. These feedback loops are further amplified by the incentives of the associated token, which — as we’ve seen with Bitcoin and Ethereum — can supercharge the rate at which crypto communities develop (and sometimes lead to negative outcomes, as with the excessive electricity consumed by Bitcoin mining).

-a group of developers came up with the idea for a decentralized autonomous organization, or DAO, in 2016.
Main takeaways -
The DAO was an organization created by developers to automate decisions and facilitate cryptocurrency transactions.
In June 2016, due to programming errors and attack vectors, hackers attacked the DAO, accessing 3.6 million ETH.
Digital exchange currencies de-listed the DAO token in September 2016.
Dao was kind of a VC fund, based on open source code, without typical management structure.
Fueled by ether, the DAO was designed to allow investors to send money from anywhere in the world anonymously. The DAO would then provide those owners tokens, allowing them voting rights on possible projects.
The first DAO fund had about 14% of eth in circulation around third of which hackers got access. Ethereum 'forking' took place after this.
Dash is an example of a DAO.