Making Sense ofCrypto & Web3
Crypto & Web3 are a huge phenomenon but can be hard to make sense of. We help with introductions to key concepts and in-depth evaluations of the claims for its social and economic impact.
Get short updates as we release new material or review important developments.
A project ofLife Itself Labs & collaborators
Our latest articles and explorations.
Want to learn more? We are maintaining a comprehensive library of articles, papers, books and other materials related to the space and the surrounding discourse. It provides deeper background on specific topics along with everything you need to fully engage with, and evaluate, Web3 and the claims being made about it.
Claims for Crypto and Web3
Crypto and Web3 are associated with many bold claims. From classic technology boosterism of better and faster, to the radical transformation of our societies. But huge controversy surrounds these claims, and there’s a lack of agreement on even basic points and definitions.
Why this Project
What is the motivation and purpose of this project?
Situation: controversial and complex
Web3 & crypto has become a massive phenomenon. Big claims are made for its impact extending to the transformation of our economy and society. It is also exceptionally controversial and polarizing with significant disagreement. Finally, it’s not an easy topic to make sense of.
The Problem: the stakes are high, but we’re struggling
The phenomenon has global implications and touches on multiple complex areas. We require good, collective sensemaking, or else risk polarization. As a “runaway problem”, the investment of attention and money has grown exponentially. Should Web3 fail to deliver on its promises, the waste would be massive. In addition, with such fast-growing phenomena, things happen before we can notice, far less prevent them (eg climate change).
We need better sensemaking
We need to make good choices, in a constructive, intersectional and de-polarizing way. Do we advance Web3 or curb it? How should we allocate our resources? Good sensemaking begins by clarifying and agreeing on what questions to ask and the process of answering them.
This is a collective effort and we’re keen to involve collaborators and contributors.
We’d also love to have feedback through our forum:
- Are there particular topics or areas we should cover?
- Do you disagree with any of our assessments?
- Have we missed or misunderstood something?
- Do you have feedback on how we structure or present the thinking?