a16z合伙人：Read Write Own，一场所有权新运动
Original author: a16z
Original compilation: Deep Chao TechFlow
Introduction
In a16zs special weekend newsletter, were sharing an adapted excerpt from Chris Dixons (A16z Partner) book Read Write Own: Building the Next Era of the Internet, which has just been published. It mainly explains the shortcomings of the existing Internet and the advantages of the new Internet brought by the future blockchain.
text
The Internet may be the most important invention of the twentieth century. It changed the world, just as earlier technological revolutions (the printing press, the steam engine, electricity) had done.
Unlike many other inventions, the Internet was not immediately monetized. Its early designers created the network not as a central organization, but as an open platform that everyone (artists, users, developers, companies, and others) could access equally. At relatively low cost and without the need for approval, anyone, anywhere can create and share code, art, writing, music, games, websites, startups, or anything else one can imagine.
And, whatever you create, you own. As long as you follow the law, no one can change your rules, ask you for more money, or take away what you have built. The Internet was designed to be permissionless and democratically governed, just like its original networks: email and the web. There are no privileges for any participant. Anyone can build on these networks and take control of their own creative and financial destiny.
This freedom and sense of ownership led to a golden age of creativity and innovation that fueled the growth of the Internet, giving rise to countless applications that have transformed our world and the way we live, work, and play.
Then everything changed. Starting in the mid-2000s, a small group of companies seized control. The Internet is mediated. Networks go from permissionless to permissioned.
The good news: Billions of people have access to amazing technology, many of which are free to use. The bad news is that a centralized Internet run by a handful of primarily advertising-based services means people have fewer software choices, less data privacy, and less control over their online lives. It’s also become harder for startups, creators and others to thrive on the internet without fear that centralized platforms will change the rules and take away their audience, profits and power.
While these platforms provide significant value to people, they also control what we see and hear. The most obvious example is"de-platforming"(deplatforming): In this situation, services often evict people without transparent due process. Additionally, people may be banned without realizing it, a practice known as"shadow ban"(shadowbanning). Search and social ranking algorithms can change lives, make or break a business, and even influence elections.
A more subtle but no less concerning question is how these centralized networks limit and constrain startups, impose high rents on creators, and disenfranchise users. The negative impacts of these design choices stifle innovation, tax creativity, and concentrate power and money in the hands of a few.
This is especially dangerous when you consider that the killer app of the internet is the web.
Most of what people do online involves the web: the web and email are the web, social apps are the web, payment apps are the web, marketplaces are the web. Almost every useful online service is a network. Networks—computational networks, of course, but also developer platforms, marketplaces, financial networks, social networks, and the various online communities—have always been a powerful part of the promise of the Internet.
Developers, entrepreneurs, and ordinary Internet users have nurtured and nourished thousands of networks, unleashing an unprecedented wave of creativity and coordination. However, most of the networks that persist are mostly owned and controlled by private companies.
The problem stems from licensing. Today, creators and startups need permission from centralized incumbents to launch and grow new products. But dominant tech companies use the power of licensing to stymie competition, disrupt markets, and impose fees. And the fees are outrageous: App store payment fees are as high as 30%. This is more than ten times higher than the payments industry standard.
Such high fees would be unheard of in other markets and reflect how powerful these companies have become.
These large centralized networks are ruthless, anti-competitive, and abusive. They suppress competitors and reduce consumer choice. By cutting off those third parties who are building apps for users, they penalize many developers, and thus users, by offering fewer products, less choice, and less freedom. Today, almost no new startup activity is happening on social networks.
Many people dont see a problem with the status quo, are satisfied with it, or dont care much about it. They are satisfied with the comfort provided by these centralized platforms and networks. After all, we live in a colorful age. You can connect with anyone (assuming the company owner agrees). You can read, watch and share anything you like. There are plenty of free services out there for us - the price of admission is just our data. As they say, If its free, youre the product.
Maybe you think the trade-off is worth it, or maybe you think there are no viable alternatives to living online. No matter where you stand, one trend is undeniable: Centralized forces are pulling the Internet inwards, concentrating power at the center of what is supposed to be a decentralized network.
The inward-looking nature of the Internet is stifling innovation, making it less interesting, dynamic and fair.
Even if someone recognizes the problem, they often believe that the only way to rein in the existing giants is through government regulation. This might be one of the solutions. But regulation often has unintended side effects, consolidating the power of existing giants. Larger companies can cope with compliance costs and regulatory complexity, while regulatory complexity stymies the growth of new entrants.
We need a level playing field. To do this, we need thoughtful regulation that respects the basic fact that startups and technology offer more effective ways to curb the power of incumbents. In addition, regulation that is eager for quick success ignores the differences between the Internet and other technologies. Many regulators view the Internet as similar to communications networks of the past, such as telephone and cable television networks. But these older, hardware-based networks are different from the software-based Internet. The Internet of course relies on physical infrastructure owned by telecom operators. But what drives the behavior of Internet services is the code running on PCs, phones and servers. These codes can be upgraded. With the right features and incentives, new software can spread across the Internet.
Because of its malleability, the Internet can be reshaped through innovation and market forces. What makes software special is its almost unlimited expressive power. Almost anything you can imagine can be coded into software; software is the coding of the human mind, just like writing, painting, or cave paintings. Computers take these encoded ideas and run them at lightning speed.
Thats why Steve Jobs once described computers as bicycles with a mind. It accelerates our capabilities.
Software is so expressive that it should be considered more of an art form than engineering. The malleability and flexibility of code provide a very rich design space, closer to the range of possibilities for creative activities such as sculpture and fictional writing than to engineering activities such as bridge construction. As with other art forms, practitioners often develop new genres and movements that fundamentally change what is possible.
Thats whats happening today. Just when the Internet seemed irreversibly cementing its place, a new software movement emerged that could reimagine the Internet. This movement has the potential to restore the spirit of the early internet: providing creators with secure property rights; taking back ownership and control from users; and breaking the grip that large, centralized corporations have on our lives.
Its still early days. The Internet can still live up to its original vision. Entrepreneurs, technologists, creators, and users can make this happen. The dream of an open network that promotes creativity and entrepreneurship does not have to be dashed.
This is the beginning, not the end, of Internet innovation. Yet there is a sense of urgency: The United States has lost its lead in this new movement.
Read Write Own: A new movement
In order to understand how we got here, it’s helpful to familiarize yourself with the broad strokes of the internet’s history: The first thing to know is that power on the internet comes from the way the network is designed. Network design (how nodes connect, interact, and form an overall structure) may seem like an obscure technical topic, but it is the most important factor in determining the distribution of power and funding on the Internet. Even small-scale preliminary design decisions can have far-reaching consequences for the control and economics of Internet services.
In short, network design determines the outcome.
Until recently, the web was divided into two competing types:
Protocol networks, like email and the web, are open systems controlled by a community of software developers and other network stakeholders. These networks are egalitarian, democratic, and permissionless: anyone can access them freely. In these systems, money and power tend to flow to the edges of the network, with incentive systems growing around them.
An enterprise network is a network that is owned and controlled by a company rather than a community. They are like walled gardens controlled by a giant corporation; they are theme parks controlled by a single conglomerate. Enterprise networks run centralized, permissioned services that allow them to quickly develop advanced capabilities, attract investment, and accumulate profits to reinvest in growth. In these systems, money and power flow toward the center of the network, toward the companies that own it, and away from users and developers at the networks edge.
I view the history of the Internet as a three-stage development, each characterized by a dominant network architecture:
In the first phase, the read age (circa 1990-2005), early Internet Protocol networks democratized information. Anyone can type a few words into a web browser and read information about almost any topic through the website.
In the second phase, the “read-write era” (circa 2006-2020), corporate networks democratized publishing. Anyone can post to the public through social networks and other services.
Now, a new architecture is driving the third phase of the Internet. This architecture represents a natural synthesis of the first two types, and it is democratizing ownership. In the coming “Read Write Own Era,” anyone can become a network stakeholder, gaining power and economic advantages previously only available to a handful of corporate affiliates, such as shareholders and employees.
This new era promises to fight the monopoly of big companies and return the Internet to its vibrant roots.
People could read and write on the Internet, but now they can also have it.
“Blockchain” and “blockchain networks” are the technologies driving this movement. This new movement went by a few different names. Some call it cryptocurrency because the basis of its technology is cryptography. Others call it Web3, meaning it is ushering in the third era of the Internet. No matter which name you prefer, the core technology of blockchain has unique advantages. Blockchain networks are the most credible and civic-minded force against Internet monopoly.
You may still be wondering, what problem does blockchain solve?
Some people will tell you that blockchain is a new type of database that can be edited, shared, and trusted by multiple parties. A better description is that blockchain is a new kind of computer, but one that you can’t carry in your pocket or on your desk like a smartphone or laptop. They store information and run rules encoded in software that can manipulate that information.
But the importance of blockchains is that they (and the networks built on them) are controlled in unique ways.
In a traditional computer, the hardware controls the software. Hardware exists in the physical world and is owned and controlled by a person or organization. This means that, ultimately, one person or group of people controls the hardware and software. People can change their minds at any time and therefore the software they control. Blockchain subverts the power relationship between hardware and software, just like the Internet before it. In blockchain, software controls a set of hardware devices. Software takes care of everything.
Why does all this matter? Because blockchain is the first time in history that computers can have unbreakable rules built into their software. This enables the blockchain to make strong promises to users that are enforced in the software. One of the key promises involves digital ownership, which puts economic and governance power in the hands of users. Blockchain enables the creation of new networks by making strong promises about future behavior.
Therefore, blockchain networks solve problems that early network architectures could not solve:
They can connect people across social networks while giving users power over corporate interests
They can power marketplaces and payment networks that facilitate commerce, but with lower commission rates
They enable new forms of monetized media and interoperable and immersive digital worlds
They allow artificial intelligence products to pay creators
So, yes, blockchains create networks, but unlike other network architectures, they have more satisfying results: Blockchain networks combine the social advantages of protocol networks with the competitive advantages of enterprise networks. Software developers gain open access, creators develop direct relationships with their audiences at low cost, and users gain valuable economic and governance rights. At the same time, blockchain networks have the technical and financial capabilities to compete with enterprise networks. Therefore, blockchain can:
Inspire innovation
Reduce tax burden on creators
Let network contributors share decisions and benefits
Asking “What problem does blockchain solve?” is like asking “What problem does steel solve compared to wood?” Blockchain networks are new building materials for building a better Internet.
casino vs computer
New technologies are often controversial, and blockchain is no exception. Many people associate blockchain with fraud and getting rich quick. There is some truth to these claims, as has been the case with past technology-driven financial manias, from the railroad boom of the 1930s to the dot-com bubble of the 1990s. Public discussion has largely focused on initial public offerings (IPOs) and stock prices, but there are entrepreneurs and technologists who rise above these fluctuations, roll up their sleeves, and build products and services that ultimately live up to the hype.
There are speculators, but there are also builders.
The same cultural divide exists around blockchain today:
One group, the casino culture, focuses primarily on trading and speculation. At its worst, this gambling culture has led to disasters like the bankruptcy of cryptocurrency exchange FTX. This group attracts most of the media attention, which affects the public image of the entire field.
The other group, computer culture, is the more serious side of the two, driven by a long-term vision. Practitioners in this group understand that the financial aspects of blockchain are simply a means to a larger goal, a way to align incentives toward a larger goal. They recognize that harnessing the true potential of blockchain is to build better networks, thereby creating a better internet. These are the quieter people who dont get as much attention, but they are the ones who will have a lasting impact.
This is not to say that computer culture does not care about making money. We are a venture capital firm. Much of the technology industry is driven by profitability. The difference is that true innovation takes time to generate financial returns. This is why most venture capital funds (including our own) adopt intentionally long holding periods. Creating valuable new technology can take up to a decade or more.
Computer culture is long-term, casino culture is not.
Therefore, the battle between computers and casinos is the main theme of this software movement.
Of course, both optimism and cynicism can be exaggerated. The dot-com bubble and subsequent bust reminded many of this. The way to see the truth is to separate the nature of technology from its specific uses and misuses. A hammer can build a house or tear it down. All technologies have the ability to help or harm others; blockchain is no exception. The question is, how can we maximize our strengths and avoid our weaknesses?
The decisions we make now will determine the future of the Internet: who builds, owns and uses it; where innovation happens; and what experiences everyone will have. Blockchain and the networks it enables unleash the extraordinary power of software as an art form.
This movement has the opportunity to change the course of history, reshape humanity’s relationship with digital, and reimagine possibility. Anyone can participate – whether you’re a developer, creator, entrepreneur or user. This is an opportunity to create the Internet we want, not the Internet we inherited.
