The post How State Channels Can Reclaim a Decentralized Web appeared on BitcoinEthereumNews.com. More than ever we are at the mercy of platform-based giants like Google and Amazon, who act as digital landlords. We have become cloud-serfs, giving our data and producing trillions in value for algorithms we will never own. Over 80% of Netflix viewing is dictated by its recommendation algorithm, and Amazon is far from a neutral marketplace — its matching engine gives preferential treatment to Amazon’s own products, and third-party sellers pay up to 50% of their revenue in fees for the privilege of competing for Amazon’s customers. The promise of Web3 was a world beyond these digital landlords. Reclaiming the Web3 thesis Web3, as defined by Ethereum co-founder Gavin Wood in 2014, was a “post-Snowden web” — an antidote to centralized control built on peer-to-peer trust. Gavin’s architectural vision has been twisted. Ethereum created “more individual millionaires than any other project” and together with the rest of the ICOs wave shifted the focus from technological principles to financial gains. Billions of dollars were channeled into speculative ICOs, up to 90% of which suffered major losses or became defunct within a year. This culminated in the 2021 bull market, where the crypto market cap briefly touched $3 trillion, and “Web3” was diluted into a catch-all marketing term to attract investors. The mission of building a trustless, peer-to-peer internet would for a time being be buried under layers of hype. Intermediaries no more The power of centralized platforms stems from their role as a trusted intermediary. You trust Amazon to handle payments and arbitrate disputes with the sellers; you trust Google to vet, rank and present information. This trust-as-a-service model creates a golden cage: the intermediary owns the rules, the data and a significant cut of the value exchanged. Early Web3 attempted to solve this problem with on-chain transactions, where every… The post How State Channels Can Reclaim a Decentralized Web appeared on BitcoinEthereumNews.com. More than ever we are at the mercy of platform-based giants like Google and Amazon, who act as digital landlords. We have become cloud-serfs, giving our data and producing trillions in value for algorithms we will never own. Over 80% of Netflix viewing is dictated by its recommendation algorithm, and Amazon is far from a neutral marketplace — its matching engine gives preferential treatment to Amazon’s own products, and third-party sellers pay up to 50% of their revenue in fees for the privilege of competing for Amazon’s customers. The promise of Web3 was a world beyond these digital landlords. Reclaiming the Web3 thesis Web3, as defined by Ethereum co-founder Gavin Wood in 2014, was a “post-Snowden web” — an antidote to centralized control built on peer-to-peer trust. Gavin’s architectural vision has been twisted. Ethereum created “more individual millionaires than any other project” and together with the rest of the ICOs wave shifted the focus from technological principles to financial gains. Billions of dollars were channeled into speculative ICOs, up to 90% of which suffered major losses or became defunct within a year. This culminated in the 2021 bull market, where the crypto market cap briefly touched $3 trillion, and “Web3” was diluted into a catch-all marketing term to attract investors. The mission of building a trustless, peer-to-peer internet would for a time being be buried under layers of hype. Intermediaries no more The power of centralized platforms stems from their role as a trusted intermediary. You trust Amazon to handle payments and arbitrate disputes with the sellers; you trust Google to vet, rank and present information. This trust-as-a-service model creates a golden cage: the intermediary owns the rules, the data and a significant cut of the value exchanged. Early Web3 attempted to solve this problem with on-chain transactions, where every…

How State Channels Can Reclaim a Decentralized Web

For feedback or concerns regarding this content, please contact us at [email protected]

More than ever we are at the mercy of platform-based giants like Google and Amazon, who act as digital landlords. We have become cloud-serfs, giving our data and producing trillions in value for algorithms we will never own.

Over 80% of Netflix viewing is dictated by its recommendation algorithm, and Amazon is far from a neutral marketplace — its matching engine gives preferential treatment to Amazon’s own products, and third-party sellers pay up to 50% of their revenue in fees for the privilege of competing for Amazon’s customers.

The promise of Web3 was a world beyond these digital landlords.

Reclaiming the Web3 thesis

Web3, as defined by Ethereum co-founder Gavin Wood in 2014, was a “post-Snowden web” — an antidote to centralized control built on peer-to-peer trust.

Gavin’s architectural vision has been twisted.

Ethereum created “more individual millionaires than any other project” and together with the rest of the ICOs wave shifted the focus from technological principles to financial gains.

Billions of dollars were channeled into speculative ICOs, up to 90% of which suffered major losses or became defunct within a year. This culminated in the 2021 bull market, where the crypto market cap briefly touched $3 trillion, and “Web3” was diluted into a catch-all marketing term to attract investors.

The mission of building a trustless, peer-to-peer internet would for a time being be buried under layers of hype.

Intermediaries no more

The power of centralized platforms stems from their role as a trusted intermediary.

You trust Amazon to handle payments and arbitrate disputes with the sellers; you trust Google to vet, rank and present information. This trust-as-a-service model creates a golden cage: the intermediary owns the rules, the data and a significant cut of the value exchanged.

Early Web3 attempted to solve this problem with on-chain transactions, where every interaction is a public, permanent record. But this is like asking a global commerce system to run a single, congested highway. Real-world commerce requires an infrastructure that can match its speed and complexity — not everything should be an on-chain transaction.

State channels present a superior infrastructure

Think of a state channel as a high-speed, private lane between two parties that bypasses the congested blockchain. Thousands of interactions — value transfers, data permissions and contract updates — can happen instantaneously and for free, with each step cryptographically signed.

The primary barrier to peer-to-peer digital commerce has been the risk that one party won’t fulfill their side of a deal. State channel (ERC-7824) design eliminates this risk without sacrificing efficiency. Before transacting, parties commit funds to an on-chain smart contract. This acts as a security deposit. If one party walks away, their committed on-chain funds ensure the other party is made whole. By settling profits and losses in near real-time, the system removes the need for a trusted central intermediary.

  • For commerce: instead of renting space on Amazon’s platform and paying up to 50% in fees, a buyer and seller open a direct channel governed by an impartial smart contract.
  • For instead of surrendering your life story to Google, you open a channel with an app, granting temporary, paid access to your data and revoking it at will.

This combination of on-chain security and off-chain efficiency enables a new creation: the autonomous enterprise. This is a system where business logic is encoded onto smart contracts, executed transparently and operating globally without the need for a traditional corporate structure.

Bitcoin removed the need to trust the government’s money printing. Ethereum removed the need to trust people to enforce contracts. Now it’s time to remove the need for people to blindly trust platforms.

Source: https://www.coindesk.com/coindesk-indices/2025/09/24/the-web-needs-a-better-model

Market Opportunity
Hyperliquid Logo
Hyperliquid Price(HYPE)
$31.65
$31.65$31.65
-4.49%
USD
Hyperliquid (HYPE) Live Price Chart
Disclaimer: The articles reposted on this site are sourced from public platforms and are provided for informational purposes only. They do not necessarily reflect the views of MEXC. All rights remain with the original authors. If you believe any content infringes on third-party rights, please contact [email protected] for removal. MEXC makes no guarantees regarding the accuracy, completeness, or timeliness of the content and is not responsible for any actions taken based on the information provided. The content does not constitute financial, legal, or other professional advice, nor should it be considered a recommendation or endorsement by MEXC.

You May Also Like

Academic Publishing and Fairness: A Game-Theoretic Model of Peer-Review Bias

Academic Publishing and Fairness: A Game-Theoretic Model of Peer-Review Bias

Exploring how biases in the peer-review system impact researchers' choices, showing how principles of fairness relate to the production of scientific knowledge based on topic importance and hardness.
Share
Hackernoon2025/09/17 23:15
Michael Saylor Pushes Digital Capital Narrative At Bitcoin Treasuries Unconference

Michael Saylor Pushes Digital Capital Narrative At Bitcoin Treasuries Unconference

The post Michael Saylor Pushes Digital Capital Narrative At Bitcoin Treasuries Unconference appeared on BitcoinEthereumNews.com. The suitcoiners are in town.  From a low-key, circular podium in the middle of a lavish New York City event hall, Strategy executive chairman Michael Saylor took the mic and opened the Bitcoin Treasuries Unconference event. He joked awkwardly about the orange ties, dresses, caps and other merch to the (mostly male) audience of who’s-who in the bitcoin treasury company world.  Once he got onto the regular beat, it was much of the same: calm and relaxed, speaking freely and with confidence, his keynote was heavy on the metaphors and larger historical stories. Treasury companies are like Rockefeller’s Standard Oil in its early years, Michael Saylor said: We’ve just discovered crude oil and now we’re making sense of the myriad ways in which we can use it — the automobile revolution and jet fuel is still well ahead of us.  Established, trillion-dollar companies not using AI because of “security concerns” make them slow and stupid — just like companies and individuals rejecting digital assets now make them poor and weak.  “I’d like to think that we understood our business five years ago; we didn’t.”  We went from a defensive investment into bitcoin, Saylor said, to opportunistic, to strategic, and finally transformational; “only then did we realize that we were different.” Michael Saylor: You Come Into My Financial History House?! Jokes aside, Michael Saylor is very welcome to the warm waters of our financial past. He acquitted himself honorably by invoking the British Consol — though mispronouncing it, and misdating it to the 1780s; Pelham’s consolidation of debts happened in the 1750s and perpetual government debt existed well before then — and comparing it to the gold standard and the future of bitcoin. He’s right that Strategy’s STRC product in many ways imitates the consols; irredeemable, perpetual debt, issued at par, with…
Share
BitcoinEthereumNews2025/09/18 02:12
Rockefeller Capital Management Boosts Stake in Bitcoin Treasury Firm Strategy by 146%

Rockefeller Capital Management Boosts Stake in Bitcoin Treasury Firm Strategy by 146%

The post Rockefeller Capital Management Boosts Stake in Bitcoin Treasury Firm Strategy by 146% appeared on BitcoinEthereumNews.com. Institutional adoption of Bitcoin
Share
BitcoinEthereumNews2026/03/05 10:39