I recently had the pleasure of attending FWB Fest, an immersive dive into the world of web3 culture and new-internet communities hosted by Friends With Benefits DAO (fwb.lens). FEST took place in the woods of the Idyllwild Arts Academy in Southern California last weekend. I can best characterize the setting as adult summer camp vibes surrounded by web3 frens with time spent in roughly equal parts:
(1) attending speaker events and panels,
(2) discussing and exchanging ideas through informal and impromptu chats, and
(3) enjoying music performances and live events
One topic that persisted across these 3 activities centered on the question: What is the correct role of the blockchain in the proliferation of web3? Should it be used a lot or a little, where, and how much? What should be onchain vs. off? I’m certain if you asked nearly anyone at FEST these questions, they would have a perspective to share. So it’s no surprise that two of my favorite web3 builders/personalities, Benny Giang and Frank DeGods, each had something to say on the matter - with Benny arguing for more content and culture onchain and Frank acknowledging a more limited role of the blockchain as a means to an end in serving into his own community through progressive decentralization.
In his talk, Time, The Internet, and NPCs, Benny advocated for putting more information and content onchain. His case went something like this:
-
Onchain “time” started ~2.1B Ethereum transactions (or about 8 years) ago and represents a tiny fraction of internet history, but this tiny fraction is (more) permanent because it exists on decentralized infrastructure
-
So much of internet history can, has been, and will be lost as a result of this history behind hosted and owned by centralized entities that can (and do) wipe that history away or are shut down entirely. The Vine content library is a great example of this.
-
Therefore, we as netizens have a responsibility to record and document our history in a more permanent way, and this can best be done on public infrastructure like the blockchain.
-
(bonus) But humans are not the only ones who can create and record events onchain, NPCs can too. This ability to combine human creativity with technological innovation such as blockchain and AI means more history can be documented onchain more quickly as measured in blocks vs. linear time
-
In short, more onchain = good for humanity and good for internet history in the grand scheme of things
In contrast, Frank DeGods focused on specific role the blockchain plays in supporting the DeGods/y00ts communities he created and runs during the What's Crypto Got to Do with It?" panel alongside Ty Haney and Jess Sloss. His argument went something like:
-
The blockchain offers unique benefits for establishing social status and in-group membership. Holding a y00t or DeGods NFT can be described similarly to owning a Rolex - something you can flex/a status symbol that gives you something in common with other like-minded individuals who share your values.
-
Unlike physical goods, which can be easily faked/knocked-off (as Rolexes often are), NFTs and the blockchain provide verifiable proof of authenticity and provenance that preserve the value of the status they provide.
-
Fake/knock-off products make it harder for authentic owners to identify themselves and each other, diluting the value of the social status derived from holding them.
-
The blockchain’s ability solves the problem of proof of ownership and authenticity is a double-edged sword as it can create other problems, too - such as the burden of self-custody. As Frank put it, “people want ownership experiences, not ownership responsibilities”.
-
Serving his community’s needs and wants is best done through thoughtful consideration for what parts should be onchain vs. off, so he believes in progressive decentralization framework.
Frank and Benny are both correct, so it’s not exactly right to frame these two POVs as in direct opposition with one-another.
What Benny gets right: Benny is correct that more “stuff” onchain can be better because of the unpredictable benefits of composability that blockchains unlock. As an example, no one could have known back in May 2022 when Lens Protocol launched that the architectural decision to have Lens profiles be NFTs would later enable NFTs to have their own social relationships and identity - as enabled by tokenbound accounts (EIP-6551). If Lens profiles were not onchain, this would not be possible.
What Frank gets right: Frank knows what game he is playing, who the players are, and what he wants to win. He understands that the DeGods/y00ts community is a group of people whom the blockchain can help him better serve in the here and now, but what ties his holders together is much more than the technology alone that powers it. Frank is wise to remind us that “onchain” should not be confused with “permanence” and to question what “ownership” really means.
Conclusion
From the outsider’s perspective, a small internet community gathering in the woods full of “web3 people” might sound like some homogenous cult-like experience - as Frank DeGods pointed out (or was it Alejandro Navia?) - “you can’t spell culture without ‘cult’”. But anyone who attended FEST would agree with me that diverse perspectives and opposing viewpoints, presented respectfully, permeated FWB FEST. Discovering these perspectives and discussing with the people sharing them - be it over the sound of Charli XCX’s set, walking back from the Lens soundbath ft. Telefon Tel Aviv, or listening in on a panel about the future of onchain media - were my favorite part of FEST.
I am grateful for the Friends With Benefits team for organizing and producing such an incredible experience and for the ability to work in a role and space that provides me with opportunities to attend events like this one. Truly the best of what web3 has to offer.
If you are like me and these topics and activities sound like something you’d enjoy, I would strongly encourage you to attend FEST ‘24, see you there!
Like what you read? Be sure to follow me on Lens and Twitter 👇