Web3到底是什么?和区块链有啥关系?

白话区块链Published on 2022-12-22Last updated on 2022-12-22

Abstract

从2021年12月份开始,web3这个词突然出圈,进入传统互联网,然后开始蔓延火爆。

今年4、5月的时候,web3在微信指数中的趋势数据,一度超过了区块链。从2021年12月份开始,web3这个词突然出圈,进入传统互联网,然后开始蔓延火爆。

从最近互联网圈的融资情况和创业动态看,似乎传统VC们都在号召“ALL in Web3”。那么Web3到底是什么?未来会如何发展?白话区块链带你一起来拨开迷雾,给Web3祛魅。

Web3是什么?

这段时间我们看到互联网创业圈子,似乎人人都在说Web3,但是,关于Web3到底是什么,答案五花八门,其实到现在还没有一个共识度很高的定义,和「元宇宙」一样。

Web3到底是什么呢?

要说清楚web3,我们还是要先看一下Web1和Web2。

这张图片之前在网络上流传很广,总结得也比较清楚。

Web1是可读的互联网,在Web1中,我们可以从网络上获取新闻资讯,但是几乎只能单方面地获取信息,无法参与互动。

到了Web2,有了留言评论、点赞、私信聊天、发布主题等等这些一些功能,所以,Web2不仅仅是可读的,而且还可写,可参与互动。

那Web3呢,我们不仅仅可读、可写,还可拥有。

可拥有具体是指什么呢?其实是落到了「控制权」上面:我们对账号、对在平台上互动产生的数据信息、对资产等有了控制权,我们能说了算。

Web3的「控制权」到底是什么?

那么Web3的控制权到底是什么?我们来列举几个简单的场景。

1)对账号的控制权

在Web2时代,我们要使用平台的服务必须注册账号,或者使用微信、QQ等统一账户去登录。当你的行为规范不符合平台标准的时候,你的账号可能随时被限制被封禁。

所以,在web2时代,你其实是没有账号的控制权的。

但是,在web3时代,你可以用一个账号登录所有的平台,而且,这个账户背后是由一系列密码学算法、博弈论等技术手段保障的,让你对自己的账户拥有控制权,不会随意被平台限制或封禁。

也就是说,在Web3,你的账号是你自己说了算的,不会受到中心化的平台的控制。

2)对数据的控制权

在Web2中,为了获取平台的服务,我们在使用平台之前不得不签署数据隐私相关的条款,否则就无法使用相关服务。

在使用服务的过程中,会产生一系列数据,比如,在某宝上我们有对商品的喜好数据、有购买能力数据、有购买频率数据等,这些数据可能都会被某宝大数据平台制作成用户标签,作为精准的用户标签卖给相关的店铺,这也是我们感觉平台给我们推荐的全是喜欢的商家和产品的原因,因为,我们的购买习惯数据告诉了他们一切。

但是,当我们被当做一个个精准标签卖给店家的时候,我们是无法从中获得任何收益的。我们为这些平台积累了大量数据,这些数据成为平台的核心资产,但我们作为数据的供应方和拥有者,却无法分的任何一杯羹。

但是,在Web3时代,我们产生的数据都属于我们自己。我们可以选择把这些数据开放给平台或者给其他需要的商家,而且,开放出去的同时,我们可以获得相应的收益。当然,我们也可以选择不开放,对于卖或者不卖,我们自己能说了算。

而且,在密码学算法等的保障下,我们的数据信息是抗审查的,也就是说,在没有经过我们的同意下,任何一方都无法强制性地查看我们的信息。你可以相信,在Web3中,你和朋友的聊天记录是完全保密的。

所以,这种控制权,是不泄露数据隐私情况下的控制权。

3)对资产的控制权

关于对资产的控制权,其实不需要多说了。在Web2中,我们的资产保管在银行、支付宝、微信等大平台机构中,除了实体资产之外,我们的钱只是这些账户里面的数据,会不会某一天你账户里面的所有资产全部被冻结或归零呢?这个是完全有可能的。

但是,在Web3,你拥有你资产的控制权,你钱包里面的资产虽然也是一串数字,但是,只要你的私钥在,你的资产就还在,基本上谁都没法强制没收你的资产。

Web3和区块链有什么关系?

所以,看过这些Web3可能的场景之后,关于Web3,我们似乎可以这样说:

Web3是要尽可能地打破对中心化平台或机构的信任,打破他们的垄断,拿回个体对数据、信息、资产等的控制权。

这样看来,似乎Web3的内核又回到了去中心化。

而提到去中心化,我们第一个想到的自然是区块链。所以,也许我们可以说,区块链技术是实现Web3的技术手段。

目前出现的公有链项目,似乎都能归到Web3的范畴,只是因为不同项目去中心化程度的差异,导致这些项目达到Web3的程度差异而已。

Trending Cryptos

Related Reads

The "Impossible Triad" Is Fundamentally a Pseudo-Problem

The article argues that blockchain's fundamental limitation is not the scalability trilemma (decentralization, scalability, security), which has been largely solved, but the lack of **privacy** and, until recently, clear **legitimacy**. Blockchain is described as a slow, expensive, globally shared computer whose core value is censorship resistance and verifiability. While ideal for native digital assets like money (e.g., stablecoins), its default transparency acts as a **tax**, exposing all transactions and enabling MEV extraction, which deters serious institutional capital. Simultaneously, its permissionless nature created regulatory ambiguity. The piece contends that **privacy** is the missing critical feature. It rejects the false choice between total transparency and complete anonymity. Modern cryptography (like zero-knowledge proofs) enables **compliant privacy**: users can prove facts (solvency, KYC status, compliance) without revealing the underlying sensitive data (specific holdings, identities). This preserves auditability for regulators and eliminates the leak of financial information. With recent regulatory progress (e.g., the GENIUS Act) addressing legitimacy, adding default, provably compliant privacy becomes a pure upgrade. It transforms blockchain from a costly, public ledger into a confidential settlement layer, finally bridging the gap to mainstream institutional and individual adoption of on-chain finance.

链捕手3h ago

The "Impossible Triad" Is Fundamentally a Pseudo-Problem

链捕手3h ago

Optical Chips: Collective Capacity Expansion

The global optical chip industry is experiencing a massive wave of expansion driven by surging AI data center demand. Major players across the US, Japan, Europe, and China are aggressively investing to ramp up production capacity. In the US, Coherent is expanding its 6-inch Indium Phosphide (InP) semiconductor fab in Texas, supported by CHIPS Act funding and a $2 billion strategic investment from NVIDIA. Lumentum is building a new factory for InP optical devices, and Nokia is scaling its advanced photonic chip packaging and testing capabilities. NVIDIA's investments aim to secure future supply of critical lasers and optical interconnect products for AI infrastructure. Japan's JX Advanced Metals, a leading InP substrate supplier, plans a multi-billion yen investment to increase its capacity 7-10 times, strengthening its grip on the crucial upstream materials market. In Europe, IQE and Tower Semiconductor settled a patent dispute and signed a multi-year InP epitaxial wafer supply agreement, highlighting that next-generation silicon photonics platforms will integrate high-performance InP components. STMicroelectronics and Sivers Semiconductors are also expanding silicon photonics production and partnerships. China is rapidly building out its domestic supply chain. Dongshan Precision's subsidiary, Source Photonics, announced a $12 billion project to expand optical chip and module production. Companies like Sanan Optoelectronics and Yunnan Germanium are scaling up InP chip manufacturing and substrate production, moving towards vertical integration from materials to modules. While debate continues around the exact future architecture—whether CPO (Co-Packaged Optics), NPO, or pluggables will dominate—analysts like Morgan Stanley argue the underlying driver is unchangeable: the explosive growth in bandwidth demand. This will inevitably increase the volume of optical engines, lasers, and related content per GPU, regardless of the final technical path. The competition for "more light" in the AI era has intensified into a global, full-chain capacity race.

marsbit5h ago

Optical Chips: Collective Capacity Expansion

marsbit5h ago

Stablecoins Finally Find Real Yield: An In-Depth Look at On-Chain Reinsurance Re | A Conversation with Re Founder Karan Saroya

Stablecoin Real Yield Found: A Deep Dive into On-Chain Reinsurance with Re's Karan Saroya As stablecoin supply exceeds $170 billion, the search for sustainable, non-speculative yield intensifies. Re, an on-chain reinsurance platform, provides an answer: connecting stablecoin capital to the trillion-dollar traditional reinsurance market. Re operates as a regulated reinsurer, accepting stablecoin deposits as collateral to back US insurance companies. These insurers pay premiums, generating yield that flows back to on-chain depositors. Currently supporting 35 insurers and underwriting $500 million, Re projects scaling to over $1 billion soon. Key insights from a Bankless podcast with founder Karan Saroya and investor Avichal of Electric Capital: 1. **Uncorrelated, Real-World Yield:** Re offers stablecoin holders access to reinsurance returns (targeting 12-14%+), an asset class entirely separate from crypto or equity markets. 2. **Operational Efficiency via Smart Contracts:** Re replaces traditional, labor-intensive capital fundraising with smart contracts, allowing a ~12-person team to compete with industry giants. 3. **Regulatory Leverage:** For every $1 of collateral, regulations allow backing $5-7 in written premiums. This leverage amplifies returns from the underlying risk-free rate. 4. **DeFi Integration:** Depositors receive receipt tokens, which can be used in protocols like Morpho for "looping," potentially pushing yields to 18-20%+. 5. **The "DeFi Mullet" Model:** A compliant front-end (regulated reinsurer) paired with a decentralized back-end (smart contracts, DeFi capital markets). 6. **RE Governance Token:** Modeled on Lloyd's of London, the token governs the central capital pool's allocation, counterparty acceptance, and parameters. 7. **Real Economic Impact:** Capital funds real-world productivity (factories, clinics, businesses) via insurance, moving beyond crypto's internal loops. The discussion highlights a pivotal moment: DeFi's supply-side infrastructure is now met by real demand for productive yield, potentially kickstarting a flywheel where vast on-chain stablecoin capital seeks these real-world returns.

链捕手7h ago

Stablecoins Finally Find Real Yield: An In-Depth Look at On-Chain Reinsurance Re | A Conversation with Re Founder Karan Saroya

链捕手7h ago

1996 or 1999? Walsh's First Test is 'How to View AI'

"1996 or 1999? Wall's First Big Test Is 'How to View AI'" Federal Reserve Chairman Wall's initial challenge is not whether to raise or cut rates, but a more fundamental judgment: what kind of boom is the current AI boom? This will determine the Fed's policy path and define his legacy. Economics is split between two opposing views, according to reporter Nick Timiraos. One sees imminent productivity gains that will increase supply and cool inflation, allowing the Fed to hold steady. The other argues that while productivity benefits are distant, demand shocks are here now, and waiting for data confirmation risks missing the intervention window, forcing sharper rate hikes later. Wall has signaled a leaning toward the first view, echoing 1996-era Alan Greenspan, who embraced strong, productivity-driven growth without fear of inflation. However, Wall faces a different macro environment than Greenspan did, with tariff pressures, expanding fiscal deficits, and diminishing globalization benefits, which could force more significant inflation pressures even if AI benefits materialize. Wall's logic, expressed before taking office, is that AI-driven productivity gains won't show in official data for years. If the Fed waits for confirmation, it might mistakenly tighten policy and choke off the very growth that could suppress inflation. This argues for using forward-looking narratives over lagging data. Chicago Fed President Austan Goolsbee presents a key counter-argument. He distinguishes between expected and unexpected productivity booms. A widely anticipated boom, like the current AI wave, can cause people to spend future wealth gains in advance, overheating the economy before productivity actually rises, thus requiring preemptive rate hikes. He cites rising costs for AI data centers as evidence of such overheating. Fed Governor Christopher Waller offers a rebuttal to Goolsbee, noting the "expected spending" mechanism only works if people can borrow against future income, which many households cannot do due to borrowing constraints. Wall also faces a paradox related to his desire to reduce the Fed's use of "forward guidance" (pre-announcing policy moves). This practice was established in 1999 when Greenspan began signaling hikes to avoid market shocks. If the economy follows a less optimistic path, Wall may be forced to choose between using the guidance he wants to abolish or risking market volatility by staying silent. The ultimate question defining Wall's first major test remains: Is this 1996 or 1999?

marsbit8h ago

1996 or 1999? Walsh's First Test is 'How to View AI'

marsbit8h ago

Trading

Spot
Futures

Hot Articles

Discussions

Welcome to the HTX Community. Here, you can stay informed about the latest platform developments and gain access to professional market insights. Users' opinions on the price of ETH (ETH) are presented below.

活动图片