Olga Kharif on Web 1.0, Web 2.0 and Web3: “The term Web 1.0 generally describes everything from the earliest interconnection of computer networks in the 1970s and ’80s to the first flowering of browsers and websites in the ’90s. In the next phase, Web 2.0, companies built applications on top of that, from social media to search engines to wikis, much of it based on content generated by users. Although that made much of the web in one sense decentralized, most things still run through big companies. The idea of Web3 is to create software and platforms that aren’t dependent on traditional companies and Web 2.0 business models such as advertising. For example, users might pay for services directly using tokens. In an ideal world, Web3 services are supposed to be operated, owned by, and improved upon by communities of users.”
Jay Caspian Kang on NAUDL (National Association for Urban Debate Leagues). “My work today, when it’s at its best, still reflects both the structure and the freedom I found in debate. I learned how to back up arguments with evidence, how to understand when someone was simply trying to deflect or misdirect the conversation and how to think on my feet.” I have written about the need for a debating culture in India.
Naushad Forbes: “Going by what the majority want is not always right. Much progressive change happens “against the will of the people”. Indeed, the essence of liberty in any civilised society is to protect the rights of the minority against the will of the majority (John Stuart Mill’s On Liberty is the classic statement). For us in India, when independent institutions set the rules under which we operate, we seem to deliver greater inclusion. Whether that independence reflects wise intent or is an unintended consequence of a power vacuum is less important. It is in these democratic features, so different from China, that our future lies.”