Traditional social software, personal address books, chat records, and interaction data between friends are basically shared with service providers. There are also some software that focuses on privacy. The more well-known Whatsapp has more than 1 billion users. Although it also supports end-to-end encrypted chats between users, the address book and other data are shared with the service provider. The second is Telegram, which can choose end-to-end encryption and address book encryption, but encryption is not enabled by default. These two most influential software are centralized service applications that are not open source. The code cannot be audited, the behavior cannot be controlled, and it is difficult to predict any changes in the terms of service in the future. Signal is another highly acclaimed secure communication application. Although the number of users is not as large as WhatsApp and Telegram, it also has a considerable number of users. Signal is an open source application, and its communication is end-to-end encrypted. Signal will not expose users' friend information or address books to service providers. But Signal is also a centralized service and faces an unknown future.
A completely decentralized, end-to-end encrypted communication application that does not expose any personal privacy data is another option provided by web3. In this new option, there is no centralized controller, only providers who provide services according to protocols and smart contracts, and everyone has equal status. Only in such a network can users always control their own data and share the benefits brought by the increase in network value according to their own contributions.
There are several well-known web3 social protocols, including NoStr, Farcaster, Lens and CyberConnect. These protocols can be considered as web3 versions of some well-known web2 social protocols. For example, NoStr's design was inspired by Reddit, Farcaster from Twitter, Lens from Instagram, and CyberConnect from LinkedIn. If the role of these web3 social products is just to provide users with an option as web3 versions of several well-known web2 social software, it would underestimate the value of web3 social software. For the web3 social protocols underlying these products, the greatest value lies in the expectation of having a web3 public network that carries everyone. The ownership and control of personal data on this network certainly belongs to the user, but more importantly, this network breaks the most important wall of web2 social products, allowing different products to communicate with each other (we can't expect Twitter users to chat directly with Facebook users), and also gives users the right to freely choose social tools, because the data is on the same network, and users can switch from software A to software B without any burden, and then directly discard software A (we can't expect to move user data from Twitter directly to Facebook, and then discard Twitter).
The current web3 social products are still in the early stages. The number of users of the well-known products mentioned above is still very small compared to web2 products. The development of web3 social protocols still has a long way to go. One question that needs to be considered is that web2 social products are now very mature and easy to use. What do web3 social products rely on to attract users?
Since the establishment of the communication network, we have gone through different stages of maintaining friendships. At first, it was the phone number, and then in the Internet era, email and phone numbers coexisted. At this time, IM accounts came to the fore. Entering the mobile Internet, IM accounts have become the main means of maintaining friendships, and phone numbers continue to maintain their important position as the inevitable basis for entering the mobile Internet and another important means of contact. Emails have almost no presence except in the work field. In the era of web3, asymmetric key accounts will inevitably become another major account and become the protagonist of people's communication and collaboration in the online world.
We don't know how asymmetric key accounts will eventually dominate the network. However, judging from the essential difference between web3 and web2, the well-known web3 social protocols need to be more open and interconnect as soon as possible to form an open source standard, so as to attract more developers and users and form a public web3 social network. In addition, for individuals, the so-called social graph is very private data. How many friends I have and how I interact with my friends are my personal business. What does it have to do with others? What does it have to do with service providers? Why should this data be clearly recorded on the Internet for others to see? Only the content that I am willing to publish and share can be seen by strangers. Only in this way can the principle of people-centeredness of web3 be reflected and respect for people be reflected. From this perspective, among the current social protocols, only NoStr is more in line with this principle, but it may also be because NoStr only cares about content publishing and interaction. In the practice of web3 concept, TinyVerse Space strictly follows the principle of "user-centric". Users can use TinyVerse Space as their own diary, IM software, email, blog, or even personal website, but all the content is encrypted. Only the data that users are willing to share can be seen by others. The user's friend relationship (address book), chat and interaction with friends can only be seen by both parties, and no third party can understand. The right to control the data permanently belongs to the user.
The social protocol used by TinyVerse Space is open source and anyone can use it without permission. This protocol is also in its early stages, and any developer can participate in the construction and share the benefits of network growth. Open source, interconnected, and user-centric, we look forward to the establishment of such a web3 social network as soon as possible.
