ps on Nostr: 作者抓住了ecash 这个构建更好互联网的核心。 ...

作者抓住了ecash 这个构建更好互联网的核心。

“互联网货币”这个概念被提及的次数不如以前多了，可能是因为定义不清晰导致的。

在我的理解中，互联网货币更多的是指对互联网上的基本操作，例如发一封邮件，发一条消息，搜索一个关键词等，实现按按次匿名付费。而不是指给某人转账100元。

跳出传统广告模式，至少给一部分人一个付费增加隐私安全的可选项。

Ecash 聪是最合适的互联网货币。

quoting note19j9…8hx2

The answer to that question can be more effectively considered when viewed within the context of the history of the development of the internet. Understanding the current state of the internet and envisioning its future becomes clearer when we examine its evolution from a historical perspective. This journey, which has transitioned from the read-only pages of Web 1.0 to today's highly interactive digital media landscape, is critical to comprehend. Reflecting on the major milestones and technological shifts of the internet over the last 40 years not only clarifies how we arrived at our current digital era but also provides insights into potential future developments.

In the early days of Web 1.0, the internet was largely a static medium, where user interaction and content generation were minimal. The shift to Web 2.0 marked a significant change, introducing a more interactive experience, with user-generated content and social media taking center stage. This evolution brought about new ways of connecting, sharing, and engaging online, but it also introduced challenges related to data privacy, content monetization, and the centralization of services.
By understanding the path that led us here, we can better appreciate why the internet operates as it does today. This historical context is essential for predicting how the digital landscape might continue to evolve, particularly in terms of user interaction, data management, and content creation. The progression of the internet reflects not just technological advancement but also shifts in user expectations and societal norms, paving the way for ongoing innovation and change in how we experience the digital world.

The birth of the internet happened decades ago, when Tim Berners Lee come up with the protocol that made it possible for people to share files remotely across telephone lines. He believed in open source technology and chose not to patent the technology. He wanted to give it away and make it free and open thing for the betterment of humanity. Some would argue that we might have taken a bit of a wrong turn over the last 20 years. Many believed that this technology had the potential to democratise the publishing of information by creating an independent alternative to the TV, radio and newspaper companies that had previously dominated.

The 1990s marked a period of rapid development and fervent excitement in the realm of internet technology, famously known as the dot com boom. This era witnessed the birth of numerous websites, laying the foundation for what would become today's digital landscape. The growth of these early internet companies was propelled by substantial venture capital investment, driven by the belief that the internet would fundamentally reshape our future.

During this time, internet services were often offered for free, under the assumption that profitable revenue models would eventually emerge. The primary strategy for these burgeoning companies was to quickly capture market share, akin to staking claims in a digital land grab, in anticipation of the arrival of a vast customer base.

Ironically, despite the investors' accurate foresight about the internet's pivotal role in the future, many faced substantial financial losses. This was largely due to the challenging reality that emerged: monetizing these websites and services proved to be far more difficult than initially anticipated. The dot com bubble burst as this realization set in, marking a significant recalibration in the internet's commercial journey.

The idea of e-commerce was already in the air, but the transition from traditional card-based payment systems to their integration with websites was neither simple nor swift. This challenge was compounded by significant security concerns. Every instance of sharing credit card details online carried the risk of data theft, which could lead to unauthorized and illegal use of this information.
Meanwhile, advertising companies, which had traditionally focused on selling ad space in print media such as newspapers and magazines, attempted to pivot to this burgeoning digital landscape. However, this transition was met with hesitance and skepticism from businesses. Companies were slow to adapt their advertising strategies to the online realm, partly due to doubts about the effectiveness and reach of online advertising. There was a prevailing uncertainty about the actual number of customers being directed to their services through banner ads, and many questioned the value and return on investment of these digital advertising efforts.

The transformation of internet companies from entities reliant on continuous fundraising to some of the world's most profitable businesses can largely be attributed to the advent of pay-per-click (PPC) technology. This innovation revolutionized online advertising by enabling the tracking of user clicks from one site to another. More significantly, it allowed for the collection and analysis of metadata about these users, providing advertisers with invaluable insights into customer behavior.

This rich trove of data empowered advertisers to intricately model user behaviors, preferences, and tendencies. They could now conduct experiments with various advertisements across different user demographics, refining their strategies based on real-time feedback and interactions. By doing so, advertisers were able to significantly enhance their targeting effectiveness.

The heart of this approach lies in optimizing return on investment (ROI). Advertisers could now direct their resources towards campaigns that resonated most effectively with their target audience, particularly focusing on those likely to culminate in a purchase. This level of targeted marketing was unprecedented, allowing advertisers to concentrate their efforts and resources on channels that demonstrated the highest potential for profit.

At its core, profit maximization is the fundamental goal of any advertising campaign. Pay-per-click technology endowed advertisers with a level of knowledge and precision that was previously unattainable. This paradigm shift didn't just alter advertising strategies; it redefined the entire landscape of internet-based business, turning user clicks and data into a new currency of immense value in the digital marketplace.

The advertising monetization model, as it has been applied to internet companies, inherently fosters a trend towards centralization. This phenomenon can be attributed to the powerful network effects characteristic of the internet. Larger platforms accumulate extensive user data, enhancing their ability to target and optimize advertisements. This efficiency translates into a higher return on investment for each advertising dollar spent on these platforms compared to their smaller counterparts. Consequently, this dynamic has propelled companies like Google and Facebook into dominant positions, effectively controlling a significant portion of the information flow we see today.

Governments have contemplated intervening and introducing legislation to curtail the power of these tech giants. However, the challenge lies in fully comprehending the complexities of this rapidly evolving technology. Additionally, there is an inherent delay in the legislative process, which often means that by the time new regulations are implemented, these agile and innovative companies may have already adapted or pivoted their business strategies to circumvent these new rules.

Our current system is the product of a flawed incentive structure, one that has inadvertently led to the creation of an unprecedentedly sophisticated surveillance system. The drive for data collection and storage, fueled by commercial motives, has facilitated the assembly of this vast network. This system, initially designed for business purposes, has transformed into a honey pot that could potentially be utilized by governments for mass surveillance.

Given its existence and capabilities, this system presents a convenient opportunity for governmental entities to monitor large populations. As a result, there is a lack of incentive for governments to actively discourage or regulate the data collection practices of these companies. In essence, through the pursuit of commercial gains and efficiency, we have unwittingly made a digital prison for ourselves. The danger is that psychopathic people who wouldn’t normally consider a career in government might now be enticed into that profession given the amount of power that they could potentially have at their fingertips.

We find ourselves in a landscape where a handful of large tech companies have centralized control over internet services. Platforms like Facebook and Twitter, for instance, hold vast amounts of user data, effectively reducing our personal information to mere rows in their expansive databases. This situation arises from a lack of viable alternatives; we, as users, have handed over our data because these platforms provided unique services without offering us the option to retain cryptographic ownership of our data. In essence, the absence of systems that empower users with data ownership has led to the current state where our personal information is under the control of these tech giants.

To redirect the course of the internet towards a model that relies less on mass data collection, we need to develop systems that do not incentivize the accumulation and storage of user data. This shift necessitates rethinking how content is monetized online, particularly moving away from a reliance on advertising revenue, which thrives on user data.

The crux of the issue lies in the absence of an effective, native internet payment system. For the internet to evolve differently, there was a need for a mechanism that allowed value exchange directly between individuals (peer-to-peer) without the traditional banking infrastructure. However, creating such a system was challenging, primarily due to the 'double spending problem' – the risk of digital currency being spent more than once.

The first notable attempt to solve this was David Chaum's eCash in 1982. Despite its innovation, eCash and subsequent efforts faced various hurdles. It wasn't until 27 years later that a viable solution emerged from the collective work of open-source developers, many of whom were inspired by the earlier work of cypherpunks. This solution reused several elements from past attempts, culminating in the creation of a functioning digital currency native to the internet.

Now, with the advent of this native internet currency, the question becomes how we can leverage it to reshape the internet's economic model. The potential applications are vast and varied, ranging from direct content monetization without intermediaries to creating new economic models that prioritize user privacy and data sovereignty. The challenge lies in integrating this technology into existing systems and ensuring its widespread adoption, thereby offering a genuine alternative to the current data-dependent revenue models.