As we step into the future, we find that a zero-trust interactive system is increasingly needed.
Even before Snowden, we had realized that trusting our information to any entity on the Internet was fraught with danger. However, after the Snowden incident, this awareness fell mainly on those who believed that large organizations and governments often tried to exceed their powers. Therefore, we realize that crediting our information to corporate institutions is basically a fundamentally wrong model. The opportunity for an organization not to intervene in our data is simply the cost of the effort required minus its expected benefits. Given that the company’s revenue model often requires them to learn as much as possible about users, realists will realize that the possibility of covert abuse is unlikely to be overestimated.
Web 3.0, or what can be called the “post-Snowden” network, is a reimagining of the things we already use the network, but has a fundamentally different pattern of interactions between parties. We will release information that we consider to be public. We assume that the information is consistent, and we put it on a consensus ledger. We will keep confidential the information that we consider to be private and never disclose it. Communication is always carried out on an crypto channel, and only an anonymous identity is used as an endpoint; nothing traceable (such as an IP address) is used.
In short, the system we designed mathematically enforces our previous assumptions because no government or organization can be reasonably trusted.
The network in the post-Snowden era has four components: static content publishing, dynamic information, trust-free transactions, and integrated user interfaces.
First of all, we already have a lot of decentralized and crypto information release systems. What these systems do is to obtain a short internal address of some information (that is, the hash value), and the information itself can be obtained based on the hash value if necessary in the future. You can submit new information to it. Once downloaded, we can guarantee that it is the correct information because the hash value is inherent in it. This static publishing system undertakes most of the work of HTTP(S) and all the work of FTP. There have been many implementations of this technology, but the easiest to cite is BitTorrent. Every time you click on a BitTorrent magnetic link, all you do is tell your customers to download the data corresponding to the hash value.
In Web 3.0, this part of the technology is used to publish and download any (possibly large) static information that we are willing to share. We can, just like BitTorrent, incentivize others to maintain and share this information; however, combined with other parts of Web 3.0, we can make it more efficient and precise. Because the incentive framework is inherent in the agreement, it is designed to be anti-DDoS. How about this bonus?
The second part of Web 3.0 is an identity-based anonymous low-level information delivery system. This is used for communication between people on the Internet. It uses strong cryptography in order to make some guarantees about the information; they can be crypto with the identity’s public key to ensure that only that identity can decode it. They can be signed by the sender’s private key to ensure that it is indeed from the sender and provide a secure communication reception for the receiver. A shared secret can provide opportunities for secure communication, including among groups, without the need for proof of receipt.
Since each of them provides the final message logistics, the use of a transmission protocol-level address becomes unnecessary; the address that was once composed of a user or port and an IP address is now just a hash value.
The message will have a time to live and be able to distinguish between the published message and the instant signal message. The former may want to keep it for as long as possible to ensure that as many identities as possible see it, and the latter hope to be transmitted on the network as quickly as possible. Therefore, the binary opposition between delay and life can be exchanged.
The actual physical routing will be carried out through a game-theoretic adaptive network system. Each node tries to maximize their value to other nodes, asserting that other nodes are valuable to their incoming information. A node whose information is of no value will be disconnected, and their location will be connected to some other nodes that may be unknown (or may be secondary). In order to make the node more useful, information with some specific attributes will be required (for example, the sender’s address or subject, which are both uncrypto and start with a specific bit string).
In Web 3.0, the communication part allows nodes to communicate, update and self-organize in real time, and publish information that does not require internal trust or priority reference later. In the traditional web, this is most of the information passed through HTTP in the AJAX style implementation.
The third part of Web 3.0 is the consensus engine. Bitcoin brought the idea of consensus-based applications to many of us. However, this is only the first tentative step. The consensus engine is a way to reach agreement on certain interaction rules, because it knows that future interactions (or non-interactions) will be automatically and irreversibly executed in full compliance with the regulations. It is actually an all-encompassing social contract that draws strength from the network effect of consensus.
The fact that the default of one agreement may affect all other agreements is the key to creating a strong social contract, thereby reducing the chance of default or deliberate neglect. For example, the higher the degree of isolation between the reputation system and the personal social interaction system, the worse its effect. A reputation system combined with similar functions of Facebook or twitter will be more effective than a system without functions, because the intrinsic value of a user depends on how friends, partners, or colleagues think about themselves. A particularly sharp example is the question of whether and when to be friends with employers or dates on Facebook.
The consensus engine will be used for all credible information release and modification. This will happen through a completely universal global transaction processing system. The first feasible example of this is the Ethereum project.
The traditional network does not fundamentally solve the consensus problem, but returns to the centralized trust of authoritative organizations, such as ICANN, Verisign, and Facebook.
The fourth and final component of the Web 3.0 experience is the technology that combines it all; the “browser” and the user interface. Interestingly, this looks quite similar to the browser interface we already know and love. There will be a URI bar, a back button, and of course, most of the share will be used to display Dapps (ie webpages/websites).
Using this consensus-based name resolution system (different from the Namecoin in the application), the URI can be simplified to the unique address (that is, the hash value) of the front end of the application. Through the information publishing system, this can be extended to a collection of files required by the front end (for example, an archive containing .html, .js, .css and .jpg files). This is the static part of the dapp (-let).
There will be some superficial differences. We will see a shift from the traditional client-server URL model like “https://address/path” to “goldcoin” and “uk.gov”. New form of address. Name resolution will be achieved through a contract based on a consensus engine, and users can easily redirect or expand. The period will allow multiple levels of name resolution, for example, “uk.gov” may pass the “gov” subname to the name resolver given by “uk”.
Due to the permanent transient nature of information provided to the browser automatically or accidentally through the update of the consensus backend and the maintenance of the peer-to-peer network, we will see that back-end DApps or dapplets play an important role in our Web 3.0 experience.
After the initial synchronization process, the page load time will be reduced to zero, because static data is pre-downloaded and guaranteed to be up-to-date, while dynamic data (delivered through the consensus engine P2P messaging engine) is also maintained as up-to-date. While synchronizing, the user experience will be very reliable, although the actual information displayed may be out of date.
For Web 3.0 users, all interactions will be conducted in an anonymous and secure manner, which is untrustworthy for many services. For those services that require a third party, these tools will give users and application developers the ability to spread trust among multiple different and possibly competing entities, thereby greatly reducing the need for people to be placed in the hands of any particular single entity The amount of trust.
With the separation of front-end and back-end APIs, we will see the additional capabilities of leveraging different front-end solutions to provide a superior user experience. For example, Qt’s QtQuick and QML technologies can replace the HTML/CSS combination of traditional web technologies, and provide a local interface and rich accelerated graphics with minimal syntax overhead and an efficient reactive programming paradigm.
Migrate to Web3.0
This transition will be gradual.
On Web 2.0, we will see more and more sites that utilize Web 3.0 components on the back end, such as Bitcoin, BitTorrent, and Namecoin. This trend will continue, and the true Web 3.0 platform Ethereum will likely be used by websites that wish to provide transaction evidence for their content, such as voting sites and exchanges. Of course, the security of the system depends on the weakest link, so these sites will eventually transfer themselves to Web 3.0 browsers, which can provide end-to-end security and trust-free interaction.
Say hello to Web 3.0, this will be a safe social operating system.