Three New Criteria for Judging the Advantages and Disadvantages of Web 3.0 Projects: Influence and White Paper Trust

Author: Zhu Weishahttps://chainless.hk

Word count: 1776

introduction

Web3.0 is also called Web3. In the eyes of professionals, the two concepts are different, and this article makes no distinction. As for the difference between Web3 and Web2 projects, simply put, Web3 owns more data than Web2. Most Web3 projects are open source programs and lack patent protection, so it's very easy to copy, and dozens of impersonations are very common. For example, after the Bitcoin BRC20 protocol came out, thousands of coin issuing projects suddenly sprung up using this open source agreement. These projects are mixed and dazzling.

Web3 coin issuance projects generally issued and distributed coins in the early stages. The circulation of coins was equivalent to listing, and it was difficult for professional investors to determine the value of early projects, so how should ordinary retail investors judge this? Is there a relatively simple method?

The competitive environment for Web3 and Web2 is similar, but there are also differences. In this competitive environment, in addition to the project judgment standards commonly used in Web2, new criteria are needed.

Web3 emphasizes trustlessness. Instead of not requiring trust, it places higher demands on trust, such as machine-level trust. In a world where devil and hope coexist, how to gain trust is obviously a key issue, which raises the question of a new trust judgment mechanism that Web2 does not have. This article describes the unique trust mechanism of Web3 from four perspectives: pioneering trust, community trust, influence trust, and white paper trust.

 III. Influence and White Paper Trust

Influence trust

Web3 emphasizes democracy. It's ridiculous that celebrities and celebrity teams have more influence than Web2, which doesn't seem democratic. The reason is that Web3 is still in its early stages, and many projects are equivalent to seed rounds of venture capital. According to the rules of venture capital, the seed round looks at people, and the A round looks at people, and the model mainly looks at people. The only mature Web3 projects are Bitcoin and those Bitcoin imitations. When a project with huge uncertainty is issued, it is equivalent to a stock listing. How to judge whether the project is good or bad? Traditional venture capital and stock market valuation methods and data are insufficient to reflect the value of the project, and retail investors are even less able to judge. For retail investors, it's still easy to judge a person. This is trust in influence. Influence trust is a judgment of people. It has six points of observation:

1. Recommended by celebrities. This is equivalent to endorsements. If the project doesn't go well, celebrities will lose their worth.

2. Whether celebrities or institutions have invested, and whether they have been locked in for a long time. Real money investment is more reliable than endorsements.

3. What is the purpose of the celebrity platform? What is his relationship with the project? Tech giants and product giants are also considered celebrities. Are they famous? Or participate or lead?

4. Endorsements from outside celebrities attracted attention, but had limited impact on the development of the project.

5. Analytical reports from professional celebrities.

6. Objective evaluation by a third party agency.

The above evaluation criteria are very unfavorable to grassroots entrepreneurship. It is important to point out that from a venture capital perspective, venture capital projects are divided into seed rounds, angel rounds, A rounds, and B rounds, etc. Cryptocurrency projects should not be externally funded in the seed round. Even for investment institutions, projects with external financing are at least Series A, and the business model is clear, so plans to match them can already be carried out. Observing the composition and past performance of institutional investors is definitely helpful to retail investors. Currently, the threshold for starting a Web3 project is very high; the era of making money by sending just one coin is over. The old retail investors who can stay in cryptocurrency have definitely been trained to become experts in investing.

White paper Trust

The white paper is like a campaign platform. Whoever wants to govern must publish a campaign agenda on what they are preparing to do. The white paper is not for the public, but for experts. Experts use their influence and judgment to endorse the project. Even so, these are still early projects, endorsements do not guarantee success, and there is still a risk of going back to zero. Because experts only comment on the logic of the white paper, there are various problems that can cause failure when the same project is being executed.

Bitcoin, pioneered by Satoshi Nakamoto, is an innovation in productivity and production relationships, so in addition to technology and products, Web3 projects also face the problem of innovation in a new production relationship structure. Not only can you start a business by understanding technology, but you also need to know a “production relationship” suitable for your project, such as incentives and governance innovation. Bitcoin's success is a success of comprehensive capabilities. If it were just a pure technical white paper, it is currently very difficult to develop.

If a project does not have a white paper, then such a project does not comply with the principle of transparency in cryptocurrencies; investing in such projects by retail investors is like gambling. It should be said that this is a scientific research project; where the research is done counts. Scientific research is also important, what if it happens? However, retail investors should be mentally prepared to do charity when investing. From a product perspective, it is necessary to use mature technology as much as possible, and cryptocurrencies are no exception. However, even if scientific research products are successful, it is often still a long time until they are successful in the market.

The white paper is actually not enough as a project document. Back then, Halfini asked Satoshi Nakamoto to provide detailed specifications for the project, but Satoshi never provided it, causing regret in the entire cryptocurrency community. The white paper is not a high requirement. If you can't even write a white paper, then this project would be too funny.

 Summarize

Due to the existence of coins, once a project is popular in the market, the price will rise, which creates capital barriers and user barriers. This is called a first-mover advantage.

Pioneering trust, community governance trust, influence trust, and white paper trust create a first-mover advantage. The above five points are different competitive thresholds from Web2. The most important thing is originality; a project without initiative is of little value. The chainless platform is pioneering in many ways.

Cryptocurrency has shown strong vitality in community governance, and there are pioneering opportunities for future community governance. There are also opportunities for applying product innovation and innovation in incentives.