31. Januar 2022

More Accelerando Than Snow Crash

The Mental Model of the Web3 Future Is Not Snow Crash. It's Accelerando. The inevitable path to a new economic model made possible by web3.


There is a lot of emphasis lately on the metaverse and virtual worlds. We believe that web3 helps to share stuff between virtual worlds, to tear down the walls between online worlds. Ready Player One shows a unified metaverse, where avatars from different virtual worlds meet. That's nice. Maybe even useful someday. There is also business and money to be made. Actually, a lot of business will be enabled or improved: entertainment, marketing, customer support, and more.

However, the real impact on the economy of the future comes from automation of business processes. In a web3 world software, scripts, and AI, can make deals. Specifically, business executing AI will have a large impact. Ultimately, AI will be able to act with tangible effect through the web3 we are currently building. It's the real economy that counts. That's why we should look to Charles Stross' Accelerando rather than Neal Stephenson's Snow Crash.

We have been learning from many examples in different fields that AI is good at finding new ways to do things. When AI optimizes a task, it often finds more efficient ways than experienced humans in the same field. For example, self-learning AI invents unconventional strategies in games. It explores strategies that the best human players would have disapproved of until they were defeated by those strategies. AlphaStar, Google's StarCraft AI once produced overwhelmingly many Oracles, a Protoss unit. A strategy no professional player tried because it has disadvantages in the later game. But still the AI beat top human players until they countered the strategy as soon as they detected it.

In another experiment self-learning AI that needed to communicate to solve a task quickly developed a more effective way of communication. They invented their own language. A protocol that was more efficient that the protocols they were given as a starting point. The language was not easily understood by humans. It was analyzed. But this took time while the AI moved forward. Understanding the AI's way is a moving target. Ultimately humans will use their optimizations without fully understanding them.

We are now at a point where software driven business processes emerge. Web3 enables software to post offers, to negotiate, to close deals, and to check fulfilment. Software is already doing significant business at stock exchanges. Software can react more quickly than humans which is important in times of high-speed trading. Some of these agents are driven by deep learning and genetic AI. While there are many details and nuances, basically trading stocks is rather simple. There are sell offers, buy offers, and real time information. The task is to optimize profit over time. A difficult task considered erratic markets, a volatile information situation, erratic market behavior, and feedback loops. But the trading model is simple: buying and selling securities.

Now, web3 promises to pull all other business into software's reach. While theoretically everything could be wrapped into a security, not everything in the real world is suited for securityfication. Partially, because it is irrelevant, like selling my own house. Selling my house is not accessible to software because nobody has made it a security, and nobody will.

In the field of patents and intellectual property rights are usually not freely tradable because there are too many barriers. IP has fundamentals that are difficult to consider automatically. Trading IP goes beyond comparing market prices. Assessing the value of IP is the domain of human experts. IP deals also need notaries, attorneys, and registers, in other words: legacy real-world mechanisms.

Car manufacturers deal with thousands of supplies, each with a detailed part specification, negotiated quality expectations, technical standards, and individual considerations. They are far from being securitized, out of reach of trading software. Until now.

Smart contracts can replace government registers like commercial and land registers. If a land register is secured by a blockchain instead of a government or an attorney, then this not only makes trading cheaper by removing the middleman. It also makes trading the goods accessible to software.

Physical properties of car parts can be measured and compared with specifications. A smart contract checks if negotiated standards are met. It decides to what extend deliveries deviate from expectations. Pricing is fixated and made transparent to all parties as a smart contract. Money flows reproducibly and reliably based on measured and negotiated parameters of contracts. In the beginning humans will create these contracts, negotiate their parameters, and set up real-world measuring equipment. Humans will also approve payments. But that is still a lot of work. After some time of waving through payments smart contracts will be made to pay without human approval on small lots. Then, when there were no major glitches for some time checking parts deliveries and payments will be automated.

Still, finding and negotiating thousands of parts is a lot of work waiting to be automated. And it will be automated. Suppliers will offer their parts through smart contracts that manage specifications and tolerances. Smart contracts also offer variations, and they will have logic, scripting, or AI to estimate production cost of variants. That makes sifting through of all these variants, specs, and tolerances for countless parts easier and humans just approve selections, confirm deals, or intervene when the AI does stupid things. And again, after some time without major glitches the industry will let software make the deals unsupervised demanding only after-the-fact reporting.

There is one more step required to completely automate the industry: planning and building factories. This will take more time. But individual manufacturing through 3D printing accelerates the process. Tesla already knows how to build Giga factories for certain products on demand. There is now so much institutional know-how that these facilities can be built in months instead of years. Factory projects are increasingly data driven and all this data will finally be used to train AI.

Software simulation of production processes also helps to self-train AI. A game of building factories, negotiating parts and resources to win market share against a competitor is not fundamentally different from managing resources and combat in StarCraft. AI will optimize itself with simulated competitions. Then AI will plan and build factories. As always, after some time without major glitches, some players will let AI react to market demand automatically. Even some goof-ups can be tolerated. Human decision making when estimating future demand, planning products, and executing business plans is far from perfect. If the financial impact of AI-mistakes is on the same level as the one by humans, the AI wins. Finally, the AI will win. And the first humans to adopt this way of doing business will become rich.

Then AI optimizes the business. The AIs will optimize communication by inventing new protocols. Negotiation protocols that are more efficient than the ones inherited from humans. There are many ways to optimize in a software driven world. Maybe they dispense with checking individual deliveries. Maybe they don't put up tenders anymore. Suppliers might deliver parts without prior negotiations based on information from crypto oracles. After all, the financial output of the entire operation is key. They might omit payments for supplies and just share the revenue. A smart contract takes key performance indicators and generates a pay-out scheme for all involved entities in a transparent fashion. There are hard short-term facts like revenue, time-delayed measurements like product reliability, and long-term soft information sources like polls about buyer's remorse. All this data can be used to optimize the business. At some time, there is data available from millions of products, markets, and processes over many product cycles. This data is then employed by the executing AI to find new ways.

Would humans base a car business on revenue sharing and common long-term benefits? Probably not. Human experts would reject this way of doing business for many reasons. Humans are good at coming up with reasons not to change things. Until they are outperformed.

Humans are also good at inventing possible ways for improvements based on their experience. We can imagine countless optimizations and process changes. Science fiction authors are especially good at that. But we largely fail to predict developments beyond our experience. That's where AI excels. It finds categorizations that escape us. It finds optimizations we won't think of.

AI will change the way business is done so much that humans will not understand what's going on. At first, we will. We will be surprised by AI's inventions. We will marvel at the ingenuity and frivolity of its ways. For as long as we can analyze and understand what is happening. Later we will fail to understand and just embrace the benefits.

This is what Charles Stross calls Economics 2.0. A business model more efficient than ours. Let's call it Economy3 to be in line Web3. Its economic processes that outperform the ones we know. Interactions and rules we do not understand, that can only be executed by AI. Not because of the required speed of decision making, rather because the rules will not be known. They will not be codified. They are decentralized in neural network weights or whatever AI is made of in the future. The new rules will not be programmed into AI. Rather AI will develop the rules because they work better than the inherited ones.

This sounds as if we humans have no say in the process. But we do. The key phrase is "work better". We define what "better" means. If "better" means more profit, then average people might be screwed in a way described in Accelerando. In this future the so-called Vile Offspring, basically untamed rouge AI, dominate the inner solar system and even dismantle the Earth to put its resources to "better" use. Earth's resources not meaning oil and ore, but the iron of the core, hence the dismantling.

A development that ends in the dissolution of our planet does not sound "better". And that's the key point. We will have to define the term "better" so that it serves people, and a dismantling is avoided. We need more performance indicators than profit. We need performance indicators that represent the wellbeing of people and the environment for that matter. AI optimizes along fitness functions and training data. AI designers define these fitness functions and select the training data. We decide how AI optimizes. We have a say. A society that really tries will have a deciding influence. Realistically the result will be somewhere between utopia and the planet's pulverization into smart matter. We must make sure that besides profit and wealth for as many people as possible, there is also well-being, whatever that means. Maybe the fitness function just needs as much Gross National Happiness as Gross Domestic Product.

Coming back to web3: this development path is almost inevitable because it is possible. The path is obvious. There are no unknowns, no new technologies to be developed, no new principles to be discovered. The paradigms are already in place. The rest is engineering.

There is one more thing: the smart-contractification of the real world. Paper contracts will be replaced by smart contracts. Business entities will learn that blockchains tell the truth. Companies will sue each other to honor agreements that are codified by smart contracts. Finally, courts will begin to refer to the blockchain truth in their decisions. Then, the real-world is smart-contractified. It will take some time to get there. But the path is clear.

Once the real economy (the one that builds smart phones, not just non fungible images) takes web3 serious we are bound to end up with Economy3. An automated future in which it is not necessary to work hard to pay the rent. That's where we want to go.

We are currently building the tools: web3 and AI. Then we'll get the real world to use the tools while making sure that the beast we're unleashing does not deviate too far from a good path. It is our responsibility to educate our societies about the risks and empower them to set the rules.

We must shape the future economy, not just virtual worlds. It's the real world that matters and the real economy. In this sense the mental model to guide our path is better characterized by Charles Stross' Accelerando than Neal Stephenson's Snow Crash. Read Accelerando, enjoy it, fear it, and learn from it.


Raph Koster’s Future of Online Worlds Applied to weblin.io

Raph Koster talked about the steep path to a unified metaverse. He raises many interesting points that address key points of weblin.io's architecture and design principles. 

A virtual discussion.

At the 2nd Annual GamesBeat Summit: Into the Metaverse 2 Raph Koster gave a speech about the future of the metaverse, about connecting virtual worlds, and about the steep path to a unified metaverse. He raises many interesting points.

The weblin.io project regards the web as a metaverse, if not the starting point for "The Metaverse". I would like to review the speech and comment the central messages with respect to weblin.io and the web metaverse. In other words: how they apply to the web as a metaverse.

Raph Koster talks about a high tech metaverse with 3D, AR, VR running on advance engines. Even beyond the engine, these worlds need sophisticated coding and modelling. Contrast that with the web metaverse which runs on a browser engine. This conventional approach makes things easier. The web metaverse gets away with much less complexity which creates lower barriers for interoperability. It turns out: things are much easier. We are lucky.

It is very interesting to apply the central messages of the talk to weblin.io because they address important features, the architecture, and design principles. Let's discuss:

Raph says: "The idea of taking multiple online worlds and cross connecting them with basically hyperlink connections, and […] hop freely between them with one client"

weblin.io comments: With weblin.io we are hopping freely between spaces with one client. The spaces being web sites, the one client being a web browser and freely hopping means clicking a web link. It's not 3D, no virtual worlds, not fancy. But the web metaverse is the biggest world in terms of content. It's the biggest world in terms of people. And most easily accessible by means of a web browser and some rather small client software, a graphical chat client with animated avatars as a browser extension or a native program that projects a social layer above all web pages.

Raph says: "Ongoing challenges include crappy voluminous user-generated content"

weblin.io comments: In case of weblin.io there everything is user-generated. It's the Web. It is often great and sometimes it is crappy. Speaking about "crappy voluminous" specifically: the web metaverse has a build-in check for content quality. Web content is produced to be used on the web, not specifically for the web metaverse. Hence, if it is good enough for the web, then it is good enough to make up a place of the web metaverse. Voluminous user-generated content will never drag down the web metaverse as it easily can in a virtual world other than the web that lacks such a built-in safeguard.

Raph says: "Play-to-earn have always had the risk of […] economy crashes due to […] mudflation"

weblin.io comments: Simulated economies with artificial money sources and sinks are difficult to balance. Play-to-earn needs a real economy, not a simulated one. It must be driven by real money that flows into the economy from the real world. Only real value creates a real economy because real money from the outside worlds is hard to get. It must provide a ROI for the outside world. That's the weblin model.

Raph says: "Players have not been that interested in item portability"

weblin.io comments: That is true in general. You won't take your WoW Hunter Bow to EVE Online. Different engine technologies, game mechanics, and balancing are strong barriers, that might be overcome someday, though. The real point is importing NFTs which have fixed real world attributes as in-world items. This needs a suitable mapping of NFT attributes to in-world features. If the mapping is transparent and stable, then real-world NFTs gain value and utility in-world.

Raph says: "The open web is a model for the kind of standard for decentralized creativity"

weblin.io comments: The existing standardization of web technologies makes the web a perfect model of a decentralized easy to access metaverse. The places are already there. Content is there. weblin.io adds people, and voila, the web becomes a metaverse. "decentralized creativity": that's what the web is about.

Raph says: "An enormous amount of the metaverse needs are going to be flat"

weblin.io comments: Often 2D is easier to navigate and a lower barrier. Navigating the web just needs a browser and a point device. That's an easy virtual world. No need to navigate in 3D to get to a document. Just a click and the document is full screen. And populated by people who happen to be reading the same document at the same time.

Raph says: "The art we see needs to break away from the notion that it is something baked into a client"

weblin.io comments: In the #Webaverse the content always comes from the server. The client fetches the content and projects a social layer on top where people meet. Check.

Raph says: "If we want a decentralized metaverse — one that is open and not controlled by one party — we obviously need to decentralize control"

weblin.io comments: Virtual words are usually controlled by one party. The web on the other hand is a decentralized metaverse, always was and probably will be. The social layer above the content that makes the web a metaverse in the first place is also decentralized. Every web content provider can host the social layer for their content by running a chat server. Once they operate the chat, they can enforce rules and moderate. In other words, they can exercise property rights. That's how weblin.io is built.

Raph says: "The biggest barrier to item portability is actually that every […] world implements that functionality in completely different ways […] There are zero shared data structures"

weblin.io comments: A common denominator of data formats might be a start. Viewed from a 3D perspective, common denominators lack the functionality required for a good user experience. But for our case, the web metaverse, typical web standards work perfectly as common denominators. For example, it is easy to make an in-world avatar available to the web metaverse. Inhabitants of virtual worlds can use an (animated) rendering of their in-world avatar on web pages to meet other people, even people from different games. From the point of view of the web metaverse all these virtual worlds are just sophisticated avatar creators. Avatars are designed in-world by all the means of the virtual world including the need to earn equipment or to buy vanity items. Then the avatar appearance is transferred to the web where people can present themselves by their game avatars.

Raph says: "[We might] take a cue from […] WordPress [the] plugin architecture [which] allows different platforms to implement the same applications programming interface (API)"

weblin.io comments: The underlying content of the web metaverse is already decentralized being provided by countless servers. Even the social content, users and game items is decentralized. Users can connect through their own messaging server. They can use an open-source client with a small set of interfaces. The reference implementation by weblin.io shows how pluggable item providers allow for decentralized game content on the social layer.

Raph says: "Just the coordination challenge of building that API is likely to be a multi-decade process of arriving at agreement on standards"

weblin.io comments: That's a consequence of the complexity of 3D worlds. The weblin.io project shows how small a set of APIs really needs to be to make the web a decentralized metaverse.

Raph says: "The need to coordinate and share multiple standards pushes towards a single platform owner that can force [necessary] standards into existence. But we know that isn’t the dream we all ultimately want"

weblin.io comments: No, it's not. The web is decentralized and relies on open standards. And the social layer that makes up the web metaverse is also built on (few) open standards. In direct analogy to the content part of the web where HTTP(s) provides data in HTML, JSON, and Javascript, the social layer that makes the web a metaverse is driven by XMPP, a distributed and standardized messaging protocol. Data formats on top of XMPP are the same as the ones that encode the web content. The standards of the web metaverse are already available. They are widely used and highly accessible. That's a perfect foundation to keep the web metaverse decentralized going into the future.

Raph says: "[Few] worlds […] have ever been willing to sign up [to] Rights of Avatars"

weblin.io comments: The webin.io project signs up. We neither control the social layer nor users and avatars. We are providing standards, an open-source reference implementation, and infrastructure to kickstart the web metaverse until content providers provide their own messaging servers. Content providers might control their space by exercising their property rights and users can connect through an XMPP entry point of their choosing. In particular (but without devaluing other avatar rights) we support the right of avatars to speak freely everywhere. And the right to "be secure in their persons, communications …". In the web metaverse users are anonymous, if they so choose, which is the default.

Raph says: "[Making the one metaverse of compatible virtual worlds] is going to be hard."

weblin.io comments: Acknowledged. The 3D case is hard. The weblin.io project approaches the problem from a different angle. We start with the web as the metaverse. The web is already there. It is easily accessible. It does not have to be built because it is already content rich. It is already decentralized. Web links even point into places inside virtual worlds. In that respect the web is a superset, the distribution platform, not just for web content, but also for 3D virtual worlds. Virtual worlds are part of the web. The summary of all virtual worlds and all web content is The Metaverse.

We want our avatars not only inside 3D worlds. We want our avatars to break free of virtual world boundaries. Not just between virtual worlds, but also between virtual world silos and the web. We want to use our virtual world avatars on the web. This is easier than it sounds because standards and formats of the web metaverse are simple. A virtual world developer needs just one week to write an exporter that lets all their users join the web metaverse, The Metaverse. 

Break free. Reclaim the web!

_happy_breaking()