Web 2 Vs Web 3

March 12, 2022
Posted by: OptimizeIAS Team
Category: DPN Topics

Web 2 Vs Web 3

Topic: Science and Technology

Context: Bitcoins and Blockchain- Ethereum’s inherent decentralization has led many Web3 developers to build Apps (decentralized Applications).

Concept: Web2 refers to the present version of the internet i.e., an internet dominated by companies that provide services in exchange for your personal data. Web3, in the context of Ethereum, refers to decentralized apps that run on the blockchain. These are apps that allow anyone to participate without monetising their personal data.

WEB 2 Vs WEB 3:

WEB 2	WEB 3
1. Twitter can censor any account or tweet.	1. Web 3 Tweets would be uncensorable because control is decentralized.
2. Payment service may decide to not allow payments for certain types of work.	2. Payment apps require no personal data and can’t prevent payments.
3. Servers for gig-economy apps could go down and affect worker income.	3. Servers can’t go down – they use Ethereum, a decentralized network of 1000s of computers as their backend.

WEB 3 – BENEFITS AND LIMITATIONS:

BENEFITS

LIMITATIONS

Anyone on the network can use the service i.e., permission isn’t required
No one can block or deny access to the service
Payments are built in through native token (ether)
Ethereum is “turing complete” i.e., it can program anything

Transactions are slower due to decentralization
Web 3 interactions need extra steps, software and education which hurdle its adoption to user
Lack of integration in modern web browsers make it less accessible
most successful apps put very small portions of their code on the blockchain as it’s expensive.

CENTRALIZATION Vs DECENTRALIZATION:

CENTRALIZED SYSTEMS

DECENTRALIZED SYSTEMS

Low network diameter- all participants are connected to central authority
Information propagates quickly
Higher Performance (higher throughput, fewer total computational resources expended)
Easier to implement
Resolution is easy and clear in the event of conflicting data as ultimate source is central authority
Single point of failure: malicious actors may take down the network by targeting the central authority
Coordination among network participants is much easier, and is handled by a central authority
Central authority can censor data
Participation in the network is controlled

Participants can be many edges away from each other
Information propagation may take a long time
Lower performance (lower throughput, more total computational resources expended)
Complex to implement
A protocol (often complex) is needed for dispute resolution
No single point of failure: network can still function even if a large proportion of participants are attacked/taken out
Coordination is often difficult, as no single agent has the final say in network-level decisions, protocol upgrades etc.
Censorship is much harder
Anyone can participate in the network and even cost of participation is very low