I find it strange whenever I see questions about the “realness” of Web3. The elusive search that builders, investors, optimists, and cynics all engage in to find the killer use-case of Web3. It’s a strange question to ask while Bitcoin sits at almost $1T in market cap.

Bitcoin to me is clearly the first killer use case of crypto. With it, we are able to preserve freedom in a society that is trending increasingly towards the digitalization of everything - including money. In a cashless society, without Bitcoin, the government and its franchisee banks have total control over the value of our labor and what, who, and where we choose to spend that on. If you believe individual freedom is somewhat an important value for a society to have, this was an important problem to solve.

Not only did Bitcoin offer a compelling solution, it did so in perhaps the most poetic way possible - with the genesis block pointing towards an article about big banks failed and an anonymous cofounder that rejected billions in order to preserve their viision.

Other people tried to solve it too and failed. Bitcoin succeeded because it was able to coordinate a decentralized group of actors to preserve the integrity of the ledger upon which this new form of value existed. In some ways, Bitcoin was the original decentralize autonomous organization.

The reason why Bitcoin succeeded is a hint towards how Web3 builders need to approach innovation. The blockchain is a coordination technology whose primary differentiator over other pieces of infrastructure is its frictionless ability to incentivize people together to do things. Sometimes in a totally trustless fashion like Bitcoin, but other times with some underlying trust with protocol DAOs. This is why NFT deeds or NFT tickets never get traction, but why DeFi and gated social clubs have.

In Web3, the structure under which this coordination happens is referred to as DAOs. DAOs have and will continue to be the killer use case of crypto. Many people decry the latest iterations of DAOs as bureaucratic nightmares, yet incredible talented people still want to work in them. Why?

They don't even try to compete with companies on the level of organizational efficiency, or clip of shipping products, or career mentorship. They give knowledge workers a whole new way of working that gives them back so much freedom, autonomy, and agency. Nobody wants to go back.

Zakku from Coordinape and Yearn has this great phrase where he talks about how we aren’t trying to compete with the existing system, we’re trying to throw a better party. The nature of paradigm shifts aren’t new technologies solving problems with existing systems, it is new technologies creating entirely new ways of living.

Twitter didn't disrupt the media industry by fixing the problems with newspapers. Ford didn't disrupt the travel transportation industry by fixing the problems with horses. Google didn't disrupt the information industry by fixing the problem with encyclopedias. And so on.

With Holon, we aren’t trying to use Web3 to fix problems with real estate. Countless Web3 projects have been founded, funded, and failed trying to do the same. It comes from a deep misunderstanding of the nature of innovation and this new technology.

We see all the ways from crazy security deposits, unaffordable housing, rigid leases, etc. that tie us down into lifestyles we don’t want to live. We’re focused not on creating SaaS for homeowners to fix each of these individual problems, but rather creating a protocol that can help people coordinate to create a totally new way to live.

One which, when people experience, they will never want to go back.

This post is a part of a sequence of smaller articles I will be writing around ideas I have every day. They will not be as polished. Please forgive any typos and errors!