| A | B | C | D | E | F | G | H | I | J | K | L | M | N | O | P | Q | R | S | T | U | V | W | X | Y | Z | AA | AB | AC | AD | AE | AF | AG | AH | AI | AJ | AK | AL | AM | AN | AO | AP | AQ | AR | AS | AT | AU | AV | AW | AX | AY | AZ | BA | BB | BC | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
1 | In your opinion, what are the main pain points of the current Web? | What should be fixed in the first place? | What do Web protocols of today lack? | What existing Web protocols have to be re-designed in the first place? | What is "D" in the "DWeb"? | In your opinion, what are the most significant changes could be brought by DWeb? | This will be achieved by the following technologies: | What's your opinion on the blockchain role? | Have you tried building applications on DWeb technologies? If so, which ones? | What is awesome in the DWeb technologies compared to traditional Web? | What is the most frustrating about the DWeb tech? | What do you think are the biggest obstacles towards DWeb? | Protocol or application? | What is the status of the project? | How long have you been working on your project? | Why have you chosen p2p over cloud-centric centralized architecture? | What was the most challenging in implementing p2p tech? | Which license does your projects' code have? | What's the projects' business model? | Funding? | How many people are working on your project? | What's the number of monthly users does your project have? | What are the major blockers for your project's massive user adoption? | You are mainly: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
2 | Huge personal data leaks, Censorship and access restriction by tech giants, Censorship and access restriction by governments, Ads based on personal data, No anonymous access to resources and apps, Web apps are too sensitive to the connection quality | Data sovereignty (more control by user), Data privacy (more anonymity), Tech resilience (from disruptive events or shut down by governments), Security (cryptographic signatures everywhere), Network anonymity (private access to resources), Tech efficiency (better performance, smoother UX) | Native personal data layer, Native user identity, Decent experience in offline by default | Resource addressing layer: DNS | Architecturally decentralized (no infrastructural central point of failure), Politically decentralized (not controlled by a single entity), Don't trust, verify (everything is verifiable), Logically decentralized (interfaces and data structures independence and granularity) | Taking back control of personal data, Inability to forge or censor content, No surveillance or tracking, Inability to shut down Web apps, Sharing economy of storage and computing, Better compatibility of apps, Eliminating "filter bubbles" in social media | P2P communication protocols (e.g. Matrix, SSB), Content-addressable storage (e.g. Dat, IPFS), P2P file sharing (e.g. Bittorrent), Decentralized DNS (e.g. ENS, Handshake), Privacy-focused networking (e.g. Tor, i2p), Data-ownership protocols (e.g. Solid), Mesh networking (e.g. Yggdrasil, Cjdns), Universal computing engine (WebAssembly), P2P databases (e.g. Gun, OrbitDB), Linked data (RDF, Semantic Web), Ad-free browsers (e.g. Brave, Beaker), Data synchronization protocols (e.g. Braid), Code collaboration (e.g. Radicle) | Not a silver bullet | IPFS, Dat, Libp2p, WebTorrent, Secure Scuttlebutt, Solid | Values and mission, Security, Interoperability, Scalability | Hard to integrate techs with each other, Hard to scale | DWeb is not understood by general user, Immaturity of the new tech, Tech giants resistance, Lack of integration with Web browsers, There is no working business model, Bad UX of DWeb products, Inability to connect peers behind NAT, Incompatibility of new protocols | Tool/protocol for developers | Idea / concept | 3+ years | Ideological reasons, Technical reasons, Economic reasons | Making underlying DWeb tech work, Achieving performance on device, Just UX | MIT, AGPL 3.0 | I don't know | Self-funded | Just me | Under 100 | My project is not mature enough | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
3 | Censorship and access restriction by governments, Ads based on personal data, No anonymous access to resources and apps | Data privacy (more anonymity), Security (cryptographic signatures everywhere), Network anonymity (private access to resources) | Decent experience in offline by default, Native payment layer | Communication layer: SMTP, XMPP, IRC | Politically decentralized (not controlled by a single entity), Don't trust, verify (everything is verifiable) | Taking back control of personal data, Inability to forge or censor content, No surveillance or tracking, Inability to shut down Web apps, Inability to block or revoke domain names | P2P file sharing (e.g. Bittorrent), Ad-free browsers (e.g. Brave, Beaker), Local-first frameworks (e.g. Textile) | Not a silver bullet, Useful for decentralized currency and payments, Useful for decentralized identity | Values and mission, Security | Lack of documentation, tutorial, videos and other learning resources, Hard to understand how to apply to my use cases, Hard to get help/community support | DWeb is not understood by general user, Not enough $$ funding, Slow adoption of IPv6 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
4 | Huge personal data leaks, Censorship and access restriction by tech giants, Censorship and access restriction by governments, Ads based on personal data, No anonymous access to resources and apps | Data authenticity (unforgeable data, not corrupted), Data sovereignty (more control by user), Data privacy (more anonymity), Tech resilience (from disruptive events or shut down by governments), Network anonymity (private access to resources) | Native user identity | Resource addressing layer: DNS, Communication layer: SMTP, XMPP, IRC, HTTP layer | Architecturally decentralized (no infrastructural central point of failure), Politically decentralized (not controlled by a single entity) | Taking back control of personal data, Inability to forge or censor content, No surveillance or tracking, Inability to shut down Web apps, Sharing economy of storage and computing, Inability to block or revoke domain names, Eliminating "filter bubbles" in social media | Content-addressable storage (e.g. Dat, IPFS), Decentralized DNS (e.g. ENS, Handshake), Decentralized identity (e.g. DID, 3Box), Data-ownership protocols (e.g. Solid), Mesh networking (e.g. Yggdrasil, Cjdns), Universal computing engine (WebAssembly), Blockchain (e.g. Ethereum), Ad-free browsers (e.g. Brave, Beaker), CRDTs (e.g. Automerge), Decentralized access control (e.g. Nucypher) | Not a silver bullet, Useful for decentralized currency and payments, Useful for decentralized identity, Useful for lots of other tasks related to DWeb | IPFS, OrbitDB | Values and mission, Security, Scalability | DWeb is not understood by general user, Immaturity of the new tech, Tech giants resistance, Lack of integration with Web browsers, Not enough $$ funding, Slow adoption of IPv6 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
5 | Huge personal data leaks, Censorship and access restriction by tech giants, Censorship and access restriction by governments, Ads based on personal data, No anonymous access to resources and apps | Tech resilience (from disruptive events or shut down by governments), Security (cryptographic signatures everywhere) | Native storage layer | Communication layer: SMTP, XMPP, IRC | Architecturally decentralized (no infrastructural central point of failure) | Inability to forge or censor content, Sharing economy of storage and computing, Inability to block or revoke domain names | P2P file sharing (e.g. Bittorrent), Decentralized DNS (e.g. ENS, Handshake), Privacy-focused networking (e.g. Tor, i2p), Data-ownership protocols (e.g. Solid), Mesh networking (e.g. Yggdrasil, Cjdns), Blockchain (e.g. Ethereum), Data synchronization protocols (e.g. Braid) | Not a silver bullet, Useful for decentralized currency and payments, Useful for decentralized identity, Useful for lots of other tasks related to DWeb | ZeroNet, Solid | Values and mission, Security, Scalability, Performance | Hard to understand how to apply to my use cases, Hard to integrate techs with each other | DWeb is not understood by general user, Immaturity of the new tech, Lack of integration with Web browsers, Not enough $$ funding | App for end-users | Idea / concept | < 3 months | Ideological reasons, Technical reasons, Legal reasons | Making underlying DWeb tech work, Keeping connection stability, Bandwidth optimization, Gathering usage analytics | Haven’t decided license yet | I don't want to share | I don’t want to share | Just me | I don't know | My project is not mature enough | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
6 | Huge personal data leaks, Censorship and access restriction by tech giants, Censorship and access restriction by governments, Ads based on personal data, No anonymous access to resources and apps | Data sovereignty (more control by user), Data privacy (more anonymity), Tech resilience (from disruptive events or shut down by governments), Security (cryptographic signatures everywhere), Network anonymity (private access to resources), Tech efficiency (better performance, smoother UX) | Native personal data layer, Native user identity, Decent experience in offline by default, Native storage layer, Native payment layer | Resource addressing layer: DNS, Communication layer: SMTP, XMPP, IRC, HTTP layer, Security layer: TLS / SSL, Network layer: IPv4, IPv6, Low-level transport layer: TCP, UDP | Architecturally decentralized (no infrastructural central point of failure), Politically decentralized (not controlled by a single entity), Don't trust, verify (everything is verifiable), Logically decentralized (interfaces and data structures independence and granularity) | Taking back control of personal data, Inability to forge or censor content, No surveillance or tracking, Inability to shut down Web apps, Sharing economy of storage and computing, Inability to block or revoke domain names, Better compatibility of apps, Eliminating "filter bubbles" in social media | P2P communication protocols (e.g. Matrix, SSB), Content-addressable storage (e.g. Dat, IPFS), P2P file sharing (e.g. Bittorrent), Decentralized DNS (e.g. ENS, Handshake), Privacy-focused networking (e.g. Tor, i2p), Decentralized identity (e.g. DID, 3Box), Data-ownership protocols (e.g. Solid), Mesh networking (e.g. Yggdrasil, Cjdns), Universal computing engine (WebAssembly), Blockchain (e.g. Ethereum), P2P databases (e.g. Gun, OrbitDB), Linked data (RDF, Semantic Web), Ad-free browsers (e.g. Brave, Beaker), Data synchronization protocols (e.g. Braid), CRDTs (e.g. Automerge), Local-first frameworks (e.g. Textile), Decentralized access control (e.g. Nucypher), Code collaboration (e.g. Radicle) | Useful for decentralized currency and payments, Useful for decentralized identity, Useful for lots of other tasks related to DWeb | I haven't tried building with the DWeb tech | Lack of documentation, tutorial, videos and other learning resources | Tech giants resistance, There is no working business model, Not enough $$ funding, Bad UX of DWeb products, We need to redesign or fix low-level protocols first | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
7 | Huge personal data leaks, Censorship and access restriction by tech giants | Data sovereignty (more control by user), Data privacy (more anonymity), Tech resilience (from disruptive events or shut down by governments), Tech efficiency (better performance, smoother UX) | Native storage layer | HTTP layer | Architecturally decentralized (no infrastructural central point of failure), Politically decentralized (not controlled by a single entity), Logically decentralized (interfaces and data structures independence and granularity) | Taking back control of personal data, Inability to forge or censor content, No surveillance or tracking, Inability to shut down Web apps, Sharing economy of storage and computing | Content-addressable storage (e.g. Dat, IPFS) | Not a silver bullet | Dat | Interoperability, Scalability, Performance | Immaturity of the new tech | App for end-users | Idea / concept | 1-2 years | Ideological reasons, Technical reasons, Economic reasons | Making underlying DWeb tech work, Just UX | MIT | No money extraction, Will figure out in the future, Freemium | Self-funded | 2-5 | Not launched yet | My project is not mature enough | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
8 | Censorship and access restriction by tech giants, Censorship and access restriction by governments, No anonymous access to resources and apps | Data sovereignty (control to user), Data privacy (more anonymity), Security (cryptographic signatures everywhere), Network anonymity (private access to resources) | Architecturally decentralized (no infrastructural central point of failure) | No surveillance or tracking, Eliminating "filter bubbles" in social media | P2P communication protocols (e.g. Matrix, SSB) | Not a silver bullet, Useful for decentralized currency and payments, Useful for decentralized identity, Useful for lots of other tasks related to DWeb | WebTorrent | Values and mission, Security, Interoperability | Lack of documentation, tutorial, videos and other learning resources, Hard to understand how to apply to my use cases | DWeb is not understood by general user, Tech giants resistance, Bad UX of DWeb products, Inability to connect peers behind NAT | App for end-users | Launched | < 6 months | Ideological reasons, Technical reasons | Making underlying DWeb tech work, Connecting peers, Keeping connection stability, Bandwidth optimization | AGPL 3.0 | No money extraction | Self-funded | over 10 | I can’t estimate the audience | Onboarding and educating new users is hard | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
9 | Huge personal data leaks, Censorship and access restriction by tech giants, Censorship and access restriction by governments, User data held by applications | Data sovereignty (control to user), Security (cryptographic signatures everywhere), Data authenticity (unforgeable, incorruptible data) | Native personal data layer, Native user identity, Native user authentication, Native synchronization layer (e.g. pub/sub) | HTTP layer | Architecturally decentralized (no infrastructural central point of failure), Logically decentralized (not a single software monolith) | Taking back control of personal data, Eliminating "filter bubbles" in social media | P2P communication protocols (e.g. Matrix, SSB), Decentralized identity (e.g. DID, 3Box), Data-ownership protocols (e.g. Solid), Linked data (RDF, Semantic Web) | Not a silver bullet, Useful for decentralized currency and payments | Solid | Values and mission, Security, Community & Support, Scalability, Documentation | Hard to understand how to apply to my use cases | DWeb is not understood by general user, Tech giants resistance, Lack of integration with Web browsers, There is no working business model, Not enough $$ funding, Bad UX of DWeb products | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
10 | Censorship and access restriction by tech giants, Censorship and access restriction by governments, Ads based on personal data, | Data sovereignty (control to user), Tech resilience (from disruptive events or shut down by governments), Security (cryptographic signatures everywhere), Network anonymity (private access to resources) | Decent experience in offline by default, Native synchronization layer (e.g. pub/sub), Native computing layer | Resource addressing layer: DNS, Low-level transport layer: TCP, UDP | Politically decentralized (not controlled by a single entity), Logically decentralized (not a single software monolith) | Taking back control of personal data, Inability to shut down Web apps, Sharing economy of storage and computing | P2P communication protocols (e.g. Matrix, SSB), Universal computing engine (WebAssembly) | Not a silver bullet | IPFS, Secure Scuttlebutt | Values and mission, Interoperability | Lack of documentation, tutorial, videos and other learning resources, Hard to understand how to apply to my use cases | Immaturity of the new tech, Inability to connect peers behind NAT | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
11 | Huge personal data leaks, Censorship and access restriction by tech giants, Censorship and access restriction by governments, User data held by applications | Data sovereignty (control to user), Tech resilience (from disruptive events or shut down by governments), Security (cryptographic signatures everywhere), Network anonymity (private access to resources), Data authenticity (unforgeable, incorruptible data) | Native personal data layer, Native user identity, Native user authentication, Native payment layer | Resource addressing layer: DNS | Architecturally decentralized (no infrastructural central point of failure), Politically decentralized (not controlled by a single entity), Logically decentralized (not a single software monolith) | Taking back control of personal data, Inability to forge or censor content, Inability to shut down Web apps, Sharing economy of storage and computing, Inability to block or revoke domain names | P2P communication protocols (e.g. Matrix, SSB), Content-addressable storage (e.g. Dat, IPFS), P2P file sharing (e.g. Bittorrent), Privacy-focused networking (e.g. Tor, i2p), Mesh networking (e.g. Yggdrasil, Cjdns), Universal computing engine (WebAssembly), Blockchain (e.g. Ethereum), Ad-free browsers (e.g. Brave, Beaker) | Not a silver bullet, Useful for decentralized currency and payments | I haven't tried building with the DWeb tech | Hard to understand how to apply to my use cases, Hard to scale | Immaturity of the new tech, Lack of integration with Web browsers, There is no working business model, Incompatibility of new protocols | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
12 | Huge personal data leaks, Censorship and access restriction by tech giants, Censorship and access restriction by governments, Ads based on personal data, Web apps are too sensitive to the connection quality | Data privacy (more anonymity), Tech resilience (from disruptive events or shut down by governments), Security (cryptographic signatures everywhere), Network anonymity (private access to resources), Data authenticity (unforgeable, incorruptible data) | Native personal data layer, Decent experience in offline by default, Native synchronization layer (e.g. pub/sub), Native storage layer | Communication layer: SMTP, XMPP, IRC, Resource publishing layer: Atom / RSS, Security layer: TLS / SSL | Architecturally decentralized (no infrastructural central point of failure), Politically decentralized (not controlled by a single entity) | Taking back control of personal data, No surveillance or tracking, Inability to shut down Web apps, Inability to block or revoke domain names, Better compatibility of apps | P2P communication protocols (e.g. Matrix, SSB), P2P file sharing (e.g. Bittorrent), Blockchain (e.g. Ethereum), P2P databases (e.g. Gun, OrbitDB), Ad-free browsers (e.g. Brave, Beaker), Data synchronization protocols (e.g. Braid) | Not a silver bullet, Useful for lots of other tasks related to DWeb | IPFS | Interoperability, Scalability | Lack of documentation, tutorial, videos and other learning resources, Hard to understand how to apply to my use cases, Hard to integrate techs with each other, Hard to get help/community support | DWeb is not understood by general user, Immaturity of the new tech, Tech giants resistance, Lack of integration with Web browsers, There is no working business model, Not enough $$ funding | App for end-users | Idea / concept | 1-2 years | Ideological reasons, Economic reasons | Making underlying DWeb tech work, Scaling to many peers, Connecting peers, Achieving performance on device | MIT | No money extraction | Self-funded, I don't know | Just me | I can’t estimate the audience | The overall number of DWeb users is limited, My project is not mature enough | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
13 | Huge personal data leaks, Ads based on personal data, No anonymous access to resources and apps, | Data privacy (more anonymity), Security (cryptographic signatures everywhere), Tech efficiency (better performance, smoother UX) | Native personal data layer, Native user identity, Decent experience in offline by default, Native user authentication, Native synchronization layer (e.g. pub/sub), Native storage layer | Resource addressing layer: DNS, Communication layer: SMTP, XMPP, IRC, Resource publishing layer: Atom / RSS | Architecturally decentralized (no infrastructural central point of failure) | Inability to forge or censor content, No surveillance or tracking, Better compatibility of apps | Content-addressable storage (e.g. Dat, IPFS), P2P file sharing (e.g. Bittorrent), Privacy-focused networking (e.g. Tor, i2p), Decentralized identity (e.g. DID, 3Box), Universal computing engine (WebAssembly), Blockchain (e.g. Ethereum), P2P databases (e.g. Gun, OrbitDB), Linked data (RDF, Semantic Web), Code collaboration (e.g. Radicle) | Useful for decentralized currency and payments, Useful for decentralized identity | IPFS, Ethereum, Libp2p, Other blockchain | Values and mission, Security, Community & Support | Hard to scale | DWeb is not understood by general user, Immaturity of the new tech, Lack of integration with Web browsers, Incompatibility of new protocols | Tool/protocol for developers | Launched | < 3 months | Technical reasons | Access control, Spam prevention | Apache 2.0 | I don’t want to share | 6-10 | I can’t estimate the audience | My project is not mature enough | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
14 | Huge personal data leaks, Ads based on personal data, User data held by applications, No anonymous access to resources and apps | Data sovereignty (control to user), Network anonymity (private access to resources), Data authenticity (unforgeable, incorruptible data) | Native personal data layer, Native user identity, Native storage layer | HTTP layer | Architecturally decentralized (no infrastructural central point of failure), Don't trust, verify (everything is verifiable) | Taking back control of personal data, No surveillance or tracking, Inability to shut down Web apps, Inability to block or revoke domain names | Content-addressable storage (e.g. Dat, IPFS), Decentralized DNS (e.g. ENS, Handshake), Data-ownership protocols (e.g. Solid), Ad-free browsers (e.g. Brave, Beaker) | Not a silver bullet, Useful for decentralized currency and payments | IPFS | Security, Scalability | Hard to understand how to apply to my use cases, Hard to integrate techs with each other | DWeb is not understood by general user, Lack of integration with Web browsers, There is no working business model, Inability to connect peers behind NAT, Incompatibility of new protocols, Slow adoption of IPv6 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
15 | Huge personal data leaks, Censorship and access restriction by tech giants, Censorship and access restriction by governments, Ads based on personal data, User data held by applications, No anonymous access to resources and apps, , Web apps are too sensitive to the connection quality, | Data sovereignty (control to user), Data privacy (more anonymity), Tech resilience (from disruptive events or shut down by governments), Security (cryptographic signatures everywhere), Data authenticity (unforgeable, incorruptible data) | Native personal data layer, Native user identity, Decent experience in offline by default, Native user authentication, Native synchronization layer (e.g. pub/sub), Native storage layer | Resource addressing layer: DNS, Communication layer: SMTP, XMPP, IRC, HTTP layer, Resource publishing layer: Atom / RSS, Security layer: TLS / SSL, Network layer: IPv4, IPv6, Low-level transport layer: TCP, UDP | Architecturally decentralized (no infrastructural central point of failure), Politically decentralized (not controlled by a single entity) | Taking back control of personal data, Inability to forge or censor content, No surveillance or tracking, Inability to shut down Web apps, Sharing economy of storage and computing | P2P communication protocols (e.g. Matrix, SSB), Decentralized identity (e.g. DID, 3Box), Data-ownership protocols (e.g. Solid), Mesh networking (e.g. Yggdrasil, Cjdns), P2P databases (e.g. Gun, OrbitDB), Linked data (RDF, Semantic Web), Ad-free browsers (e.g. Brave, Beaker), Data synchronization protocols (e.g. Braid), CRDTs (e.g. Automerge), Local-first frameworks (e.g. Textile), Decentralized access control (e.g. Nucypher) | Not a silver bullet, Useful for lots of other tasks related to DWeb | IPFS, Dat, Secure Scuttlebutt, OrbitDB | Values and mission, Community & Support | Lack of documentation, tutorial, videos and other learning resources, Hard to understand how to apply to my use cases, Hard to integrate techs with each other | DWeb is not understood by general user, Immaturity of the new tech, Tech giants resistance, Lack of integration with Web browsers, Bad UX of DWeb products, Inability to connect peers behind NAT, Incompatibility of new protocols, Slow adoption of IPv6 | Tool/protocol for developers | Under development | < 1 year | Ideological reasons, Technical reasons | Making underlying DWeb tech work, Scaling to many peers, Access control | MIT, AGPL 3.0 | No money extraction, Will figure out in the future | Just me | Not launched yet | Onboarding and educating new users is hard, My project is not mature enough | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
16 | Censorship and access restriction by tech giants, User data held by applications | Data sovereignty (control to user), Data privacy (more anonymity) | Native user identity, Native user authentication | Resource addressing layer: DNS, Communication layer: SMTP, XMPP, IRC | Politically decentralized (not controlled by a single entity) | Taking back control of personal data | Decentralized identity (e.g. DID, 3Box), Local-first frameworks (e.g. Textile) | Useful for decentralized identity | Textile | Values and mission | Hard to understand how to apply to my use cases | Immaturity of the new tech | App for end-users | Idea / concept | < 3 months | Technical reasons | Keeping connection stability | MIT | Freemium | I don't know | Just me | Under 100 | My project is not mature enough | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
17 | Censorship and access restriction by tech giants, Censorship and access restriction by governments, No anonymous access to resources and apps | Data privacy (more anonymity), Tech resilience (from disruptive events or shut down by governments), Network anonymity (private access to resources) | None of the above | Resource addressing layer: DNS | Don't trust, verify (everything is verifiable) | Inability to forge or censor content, No surveillance or tracking, Inability to block or revoke domain names | P2P communication protocols (e.g. Matrix, SSB), P2P file sharing (e.g. Bittorrent), Privacy-focused networking (e.g. Tor, i2p), Mesh networking (e.g. Yggdrasil, Cjdns) | Useful for digital certificates | IPFS, Libp2p, ZeroNet | Security, Scalability | Hard to integrate techs with each other, Hard to get help/community support | Immaturity of the new tech, Inability to connect peers behind NAT, Slow adoption of IPv6 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
18 | Huge personal data leaks, Censorship and access restriction by tech giants, Censorship and access restriction by governments, Ads based on personal data, User data held by applications, | Data sovereignty (control to user), Data privacy (more anonymity), Data authenticity (unforgeable, incorruptible data), Tech efficiency (better performance, smoother UX) | None of the above | Resource addressing layer: DNS, HTTP layer, Security layer: TLS / SSL, Network layer: IPv4, IPv6, Low-level transport layer: TCP, UDP | Blockchain (e.g. Ethereum) | Not a silver bullet, Useful for decentralized currency and payments, Useful for decentralized identity, Waste of time | I haven't tried building with the DWeb tech | Lack of integration with Web browsers, We need to redesign or fix low-level protocols first | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
19 | Huge personal data leaks, Censorship and access restriction by tech giants, Ads based on personal data, User data held by applications, | Data sovereignty (control to user) | Native user identity, Native user authentication, Native payment layer | Resource addressing layer: DNS, Low-level transport layer: TCP, UDP | Architecturally decentralized (no infrastructural central point of failure), Logically decentralized (not a single software monolith), Don't trust, verify (everything is verifiable) | Taking back control of personal data, Sharing economy of storage and computing | Decentralized identity (e.g. DID, 3Box), Mesh networking (e.g. Yggdrasil, Cjdns), Universal computing engine (WebAssembly), Blockchain (e.g. Ethereum) | Useful for decentralized currency and payments, Useful for decentralized identity, Useful for lots of other tasks related to DWeb | IPFS, Ethereum, OrbitDB, Blockstack, 3Box, Embark (Status) | Values and mission, Security, Community & Support | Lack of documentation, tutorial, videos and other learning resources, Hard to integrate techs with each other, Hard to scale | DWeb is not understood by general user, Immaturity of the new tech, Bad UX of DWeb products | App for end-users | < 1 year | Making underlying DWeb tech work, Access control, Just UX, Gathering usage analytics | MIT | Just me | I don't know | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
20 | Huge personal data leaks, Censorship and access restriction by tech giants, Ads based on personal data | Data sovereignty (control to user), Data privacy (more anonymity), Tech resilience (from disruptive events or shut down by governments), Tech efficiency (better performance, smoother UX) | Native personal data layer, Native storage layer | Resource addressing layer: DNS, Communication layer: SMTP, XMPP, IRC | Architecturally decentralized (no infrastructural central point of failure), Politically decentralized (not controlled by a single entity), Logically decentralized (not a single software monolith) | Taking back control of personal data, Sharing economy of storage and computing, Better compatibility of apps | P2P communication protocols (e.g. Matrix, SSB), Content-addressable storage (e.g. Dat, IPFS), Privacy-focused networking (e.g. Tor, i2p), Blockchain (e.g. Ethereum) | Useful for decentralized currency and payments, Useful for digital certificates | Security, Scalability, Performance, Documentation, Ease of use | None of these, everything is perfect! | DWeb is not understood by general user, Incompatibility of new protocols | App for end-users | Under development | 3+ years | Ideological reasons, Technical reasons, Economic reasons | Making underlying DWeb tech work, Bandwidth optimization | I don't want to share | I don’t want to share | Just me | I can’t estimate the audience | Onboarding and educating new users is hard, My project is not mature enough, Not enough marketing budget | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
21 | Huge personal data leaks, Censorship and access restriction by tech giants, Censorship and access restriction by governments, Ads based on personal data, User data held by applications, No anonymous access to resources and apps | Data sovereignty (control to user), Tech resilience (from disruptive events or shut down by governments) | Resource addressing layer: DNS | Architecturally decentralized (no infrastructural central point of failure) | Taking back control of personal data, No surveillance or tracking | P2P communication protocols (e.g. Matrix, SSB), Content-addressable storage (e.g. Dat, IPFS), P2P file sharing (e.g. Bittorrent), Decentralized DNS (e.g. ENS, Handshake), Privacy-focused networking (e.g. Tor, i2p), Decentralized identity (e.g. DID, 3Box), Data-ownership protocols (e.g. Solid), Mesh networking (e.g. Yggdrasil, Cjdns), Universal computing engine (WebAssembly), Blockchain (e.g. Ethereum), Linked data (RDF, Semantic Web), Decentralized access control (e.g. Nucypher) | Not a silver bullet, Useful for lots of other tasks related to DWeb | I haven't tried building with the DWeb tech | Lack of documentation, tutorial, videos and other learning resources, Hard to understand how to apply to my use cases, Hard to integrate techs with each other | DWeb is not understood by general user, Tech giants resistance, Lack of integration with Web browsers, There is no working business model, Bad UX of DWeb products, Inability to connect peers behind NAT, Slow adoption of IPv6 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
22 | Censorship and access restriction by tech giants | Data sovereignty (control to user) | Native personal data layer | Resource addressing layer: DNS | Architecturally decentralized (no infrastructural central point of failure) | Taking back control of personal data | P2P file sharing (e.g. Bittorrent), Privacy-focused networking (e.g. Tor, i2p), Data-ownership protocols (e.g. Solid) | Not a silver bullet | IPFS, Ethereum, Solid | Values and mission | Hard to understand how to apply to my use cases | Tech giants resistance | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
23 | Censorship and access restriction by tech giants, Censorship and access restriction by governments, , Web apps are too sensitive to the connection quality | Tech resilience (from disruptive events or shut down by governments), Tech efficiency (better performance, smoother UX) | Resource addressing layer: DNS, Communication layer: SMTP, XMPP, IRC, Security layer: TLS / SSL, Network layer: IPv4, IPv6 | Architecturally decentralized (no infrastructural central point of failure), Politically decentralized (not controlled by a single entity) | Inability to forge or censor content, Inability to shut down Web apps, Sharing economy of storage and computing, Inability to block or revoke domain names | P2P communication protocols (e.g. Matrix, SSB), Content-addressable storage (e.g. Dat, IPFS), P2P file sharing (e.g. Bittorrent), Decentralized DNS (e.g. ENS, Handshake), Privacy-focused networking (e.g. Tor, i2p), Mesh networking (e.g. Yggdrasil, Cjdns), Universal computing engine (WebAssembly), Blockchain (e.g. Ethereum) | Useful for decentralized currency and payments, Useful for decentralized identity, Useful for lots of other tasks related to DWeb, Useful for digital certificates | I haven't tried building with the DWeb tech | Hard to integrate techs with each other, Hard to scale | DWeb is not understood by general user, Immaturity of the new tech, Tech giants resistance, There is no working business model, Bad UX of DWeb products, We need to redesign or fix low-level protocols first | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
24 | Huge personal data leaks, Ads based on personal data, User data held by applications, Web apps are too sensitive to the connection quality | Data sovereignty (control to user), Data privacy (more anonymity), Data authenticity (unforgeable, incorruptible data) | Native user identity, Decent experience in offline by default, Native user authentication, Native synchronization layer (e.g. pub/sub), Native storage layer, Native payment layer | Resource addressing layer: DNS, Resource publishing layer: Atom / RSS, Low-level transport layer: TCP, UDP | Architecturally decentralized (no infrastructural central point of failure), Logically decentralized (not a single software monolith), Don't trust, verify (everything is verifiable) | Taking back control of personal data, Sharing economy of storage and computing, Better compatibility of apps | Content-addressable storage (e.g. Dat, IPFS), Decentralized identity (e.g. DID, 3Box), Universal computing engine (WebAssembly), Linked data (RDF, Semantic Web), CRDTs (e.g. Automerge), Local-first frameworks (e.g. Textile) | Useful for decentralized currency and payments, Useful for decentralized identity, Useful for digital certificates | IPFS, Libp2p, Textile | Security, Scalability, Ease of use | Lack of documentation, tutorial, videos and other learning resources, Hard to understand how to apply to my use cases, Hard to integrate techs with each other | DWeb is not understood by general user, Tech giants resistance, There is no working business model, Not enough $$ funding, Inability to connect peers behind NAT, Incompatibility of new protocols | App for end-users | Under development | < 6 months | Ideological reasons, Technical reasons | Making underlying DWeb tech work, Scaling to many peers, Connecting peers | Apache 2.0 | Will figure out in the future | Self-funded | Just me | Not launched yet | My project is not mature enough | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
25 | Huge personal data leaks, Censorship and access restriction by tech giants, Ads based on personal data, User data held by applications, No anonymous access to resources and apps, Web apps are too sensitive to the connection quality | Data sovereignty (control to user), Data privacy (more anonymity), Tech resilience (from disruptive events or shut down by governments), Tech efficiency (better performance, smoother UX) | Decent experience in offline by default, Native synchronization layer (e.g. pub/sub) | Architecturally decentralized (no infrastructural central point of failure), Politically decentralized (not controlled by a single entity), Logically decentralized (not a single software monolith), Don't trust, verify (everything is verifiable) | Taking back control of personal data, No surveillance or tracking, Better compatibility of apps, Eliminating "filter bubbles" in social media | Privacy-focused networking (e.g. Tor, i2p), Data-ownership protocols (e.g. Solid), Linked data (RDF, Semantic Web), Ad-free browsers (e.g. Brave, Beaker), Data synchronization protocols (e.g. Braid), Local-first frameworks (e.g. Textile) | Waste of time | IPFS, Dat, Secure Scuttlebutt | Values and mission | Lack of documentation, tutorial, videos and other learning resources, Hard to understand how to apply to my use cases, Hard to integrate techs with each other, Hard to scale | DWeb is not understood by general user, Immaturity of the new tech, Tech giants resistance, Lack of integration with Web browsers, Not enough $$ funding, Bad UX of DWeb products, Incompatibility of new protocols, We need to redesign or fix low-level protocols first | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
26 | Censorship and access restriction by governments, Ads based on personal data | Data sovereignty (control to user), Tech resilience (from disruptive events or shut down by governments) | Native user identity, Native user authentication | Resource publishing layer: Atom / RSS | Architecturally decentralized (no infrastructural central point of failure) | Better compatibility of apps | Not a silver bullet | I haven't tried building with the DWeb tech | Hard to integrate techs with each other | DWeb is not understood by general user, Immaturity of the new tech, Tech giants resistance, There is no working business model, Incompatibility of new protocols | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
27 | Huge personal data leaks, Censorship and access restriction by tech giants, Censorship and access restriction by governments, Ads based on personal data, User data held by applications | Data sovereignty (control to user), Data privacy (more anonymity), Tech resilience (from disruptive events or shut down by governments), Security (cryptographic signatures everywhere), Data authenticity (unforgeable, incorruptible data) | Architecturally decentralized (no infrastructural central point of failure), Politically decentralized (not controlled by a single entity), Logically decentralized (not a single software monolith), Don't trust, verify (everything is verifiable) | Taking back control of personal data, Inability to forge or censor content, No surveillance or tracking, Inability to shut down Web apps, Sharing economy of storage and computing, Inability to block or revoke domain names, Better compatibility of apps, Eliminating "filter bubbles" in social media | Not a silver bullet, Useful for decentralized currency and payments, Useful for decentralized identity, Useful for lots of other tasks related to DWeb, Useful for digital certificates | Dat | Security, Scalability | DWeb is not understood by general user, Immaturity of the new tech, Tech giants resistance, Not enough $$ funding, Bad UX of DWeb products, We need to redesign or fix low-level protocols first | Launched | 3+ years | Ideological reasons, Technical reasons, Economic reasons, Legal reasons | Access control, Spam prevention | MIT, AGPL 3.0, Apache 2.0, AGPL 2.0 | No money extraction | Self-funded, VC / Angel | over 10 | I can’t estimate the audience | Onboarding and educating new users is hard, The overall number of DWeb users is limited | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
28 | Huge personal data leaks, Censorship and access restriction by tech giants, Censorship and access restriction by governments, Ads based on personal data | Data privacy (more anonymity), Network anonymity (private access to resources) | Native user identity, Native user authentication, Native payment layer | Politically decentralized (not controlled by a single entity), Don't trust, verify (everything is verifiable) | Inability to forge or censor content, Inability to shut down Web apps | P2P file sharing (e.g. Bittorrent), Decentralized DNS (e.g. ENS, Handshake), Mesh networking (e.g. Yggdrasil, Cjdns), CRDTs (e.g. Automerge) | Not a silver bullet | I haven't tried building with the DWeb tech | Hard to integrate techs with each other | Not enough $$ funding, Slow adoption of IPv6 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
29 | Huge personal data leaks, Censorship and access restriction by tech giants, User data held by applications, No anonymous access to resources and apps, | Data sovereignty (control to user), Data privacy (more anonymity), Network anonymity (private access to resources) | Native personal data layer, Native user identity, Decent experience in offline by default, Native payment layer | Resource addressing layer: DNS, Resource publishing layer: Atom / RSS, Network layer: IPv4, IPv6 | Architecturally decentralized (no infrastructural central point of failure) | Inability to forge or censor content | P2P communication protocols (e.g. Matrix, SSB), P2P file sharing (e.g. Bittorrent), Decentralized DNS (e.g. ENS, Handshake), Privacy-focused networking (e.g. Tor, i2p), Data-ownership protocols (e.g. Solid), Mesh networking (e.g. Yggdrasil, Cjdns), Blockchain (e.g. Ethereum), Data synchronization protocols (e.g. Braid) | Not a silver bullet, Waste of time | ZeroNet, Blockstack | Security, Interoperability | Lack of documentation, tutorial, videos and other learning resources, Hard to get help/community support, It just doesn't work | Immaturity of the new tech, Lack of integration with Web browsers, There is no working business model, Bad UX of DWeb products | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
30 | Huge personal data leaks, Censorship and access restriction by governments, Web apps are too sensitive to the connection quality | Data sovereignty (control to user), Data authenticity (unforgeable, incorruptible data), Tech efficiency (better performance, smoother UX) | Decent experience in offline by default, Native payment layer | HTTP layer, Network layer: IPv4, IPv6, Low-level transport layer: TCP, UDP | Architecturally decentralized (no infrastructural central point of failure), Don't trust, verify (everything is verifiable) | Taking back control of personal data, No surveillance or tracking, Sharing economy of storage and computing | Useful for decentralized identity, Useful for lots of other tasks related to DWeb, Useful for digital certificates | IPFS, Ethereum, Dat, Libp2p, WebTorrent | Hard to understand how to apply to my use cases, Hard to scale | Tool/protocol for developers | Under development | < 6 months | Technical reasons, Economic reasons | Scaling to many peers, Access control, Spam prevention | MIT | I don't want to share | I don’t want to share | 2-5 | I don’t want to share | My project is not mature enough | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
31 | Huge personal data leaks, Censorship and access restriction by tech giants, Censorship and access restriction by governments | Data sovereignty (control to user), Data privacy (more anonymity), Tech resilience (from disruptive events or shut down by governments), Security (cryptographic signatures everywhere) | Native user identity, Native payment layer | Communication layer: SMTP, XMPP, IRC | Architecturally decentralized (no infrastructural central point of failure), Politically decentralized (not controlled by a single entity), Don't trust, verify (everything is verifiable) | Taking back control of personal data, Inability to forge or censor content, Inability to shut down Web apps, Inability to block or revoke domain names | P2P communication protocols (e.g. Matrix, SSB), Content-addressable storage (e.g. Dat, IPFS), Blockchain (e.g. Ethereum) | Useful for decentralized currency and payments, Useful for decentralized identity, Useful for lots of other tasks related to DWeb, Useful for digital certificates | Other blockchain | Values and mission, Security, Community & Support | Lack of documentation, tutorial, videos and other learning resources, Hard to integrate techs with each other | DWeb is not understood by general user, Immaturity of the new tech, Lack of integration with Web browsers, Bad UX of DWeb products | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
32 | Huge personal data leaks, Censorship and access restriction by tech giants, Censorship and access restriction by governments, Ads based on personal data, User data held by applications, No anonymous access to resources and apps | Data sovereignty (control to user), Data privacy (more anonymity), Tech resilience (from disruptive events or shut down by governments), Network anonymity (private access to resources), Data authenticity (unforgeable, incorruptible data) | Native personal data layer, Decent experience in offline by default, Native storage layer, Native computing layer | Resource addressing layer: DNS, Communication layer: SMTP, XMPP, IRC, Security layer: TLS / SSL | Architecturally decentralized (no infrastructural central point of failure), Politically decentralized (not controlled by a single entity), Logically decentralized (not a single software monolith) | Taking back control of personal data, Inability to forge or censor content, No surveillance or tracking, Inability to shut down Web apps, Inability to block or revoke domain names | P2P communication protocols (e.g. Matrix, SSB), P2P file sharing (e.g. Bittorrent), Decentralized DNS (e.g. ENS, Handshake), Privacy-focused networking (e.g. Tor, i2p), Mesh networking (e.g. Yggdrasil, Cjdns), P2P databases (e.g. Gun, OrbitDB), Data synchronization protocols (e.g. Braid), Local-first frameworks (e.g. Textile) | Waste of time | I haven't tried building with the DWeb tech | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
33 | User data held by applications, | Data sovereignty (control to user), Security (cryptographic signatures everywhere) | Native personal data layer, Native user identity, Native payment layer | Resource addressing layer: DNS, HTTP layer | Architecturally decentralized (no infrastructural central point of failure) | Taking back control of personal data | Data-ownership protocols (e.g. Solid) | Not a silver bullet, Useful for decentralized identity | I haven't tried building with the DWeb tech | Hard to understand how to apply to my use cases | Immaturity of the new tech, Lack of integration with Web browsers, Bad UX of DWeb products | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
34 | Huge personal data leaks, Censorship and access restriction by governments, Ads based on personal data, No anonymous access to resources and apps | Tech resilience (from disruptive events or shut down by governments), Network anonymity (private access to resources), Data authenticity (unforgeable, incorruptible data) | Native personal data layer, Native user identity, Decent experience in offline by default, Native user authentication, Native payment layer | Resource addressing layer: DNS, Communication layer: SMTP, XMPP, IRC, HTTP layer, Security layer: TLS / SSL | Architecturally decentralized (no infrastructural central point of failure) | Taking back control of personal data, Inability to forge or censor content, Better compatibility of apps, Eliminating "filter bubbles" in social media | P2P communication protocols (e.g. Matrix, SSB), Content-addressable storage (e.g. Dat, IPFS), P2P file sharing (e.g. Bittorrent), Privacy-focused networking (e.g. Tor, i2p), Universal computing engine (WebAssembly), Blockchain (e.g. Ethereum), Linked data (RDF, Semantic Web), Ad-free browsers (e.g. Brave, Beaker) | Not a silver bullet, Useful for decentralized currency and payments, Useful for digital certificates | IPFS, Ethereum, Dat, WebTorrent, Other blockchain | Values and mission, Security, Community & Support, Scalability, Documentation | Hard to understand how to apply to my use cases, Hard to integrate techs with each other | DWeb is not understood by general user, Tech giants resistance, Lack of integration with Web browsers, There is no working business model | App for end-users | Under development | < 1 year | Ideological reasons, Technical reasons | Making underlying DWeb tech work, Bandwidth optimization, Gathering usage analytics | Haven’t decided license yet | Will figure out in the future | Self-funded | 2-5 | 100 - 1000 | The overall number of DWeb users is limited, Not enough marketing budget, My project is not mature enough | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
35 | Huge personal data leaks | Data sovereignty (control to user), Data privacy (more anonymity), Tech resilience (from disruptive events or shut down by governments), Security (cryptographic signatures everywhere) | Architecturally decentralized (no infrastructural central point of failure) | Sharing economy of storage and computing | Content-addressable storage (e.g. Dat, IPFS), P2P file sharing (e.g. Bittorrent), Decentralized DNS (e.g. ENS, Handshake), Privacy-focused networking (e.g. Tor, i2p), Decentralized identity (e.g. DID, 3Box), Data-ownership protocols (e.g. Solid), Mesh networking (e.g. Yggdrasil, Cjdns), Universal computing engine (WebAssembly), Blockchain (e.g. Ethereum), P2P databases (e.g. Gun, OrbitDB), Data synchronization protocols (e.g. Braid), CRDTs (e.g. Automerge), Local-first frameworks (e.g. Textile), Decentralized access control (e.g. Nucypher), Code collaboration (e.g. Radicle) | Not a silver bullet, Useful for decentralized currency and payments, Useful for decentralized identity, Useful for digital certificates | Ethereum, Blockstack | Values and mission, Security, Interoperability, Scalability | Lack of documentation, tutorial, videos and other learning resources, Hard to understand how to apply to my use cases, Hard to integrate techs with each other, Hard to get help/community support | DWeb is not understood by general user, Lack of integration with Web browsers, Not enough $$ funding, Incompatibility of new protocols, Slow adoption of IPv6 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
36 | Huge personal data leaks, Censorship and access restriction by tech giants, Censorship and access restriction by governments, Ads based on personal data, User data held by applications, No anonymous access to resources and apps | Data sovereignty (control to user), Data privacy (more anonymity), Tech resilience (from disruptive events or shut down by governments), Security (cryptographic signatures everywhere), Network anonymity (private access to resources), Data authenticity (unforgeable, incorruptible data) | Native personal data layer, Native user identity, Native user authentication, Native storage layer, Native payment layer, Native computing layer | Resource addressing layer: DNS, Communication layer: SMTP, XMPP, IRC, HTTP layer, Security layer: TLS / SSL | Architecturally decentralized (no infrastructural central point of failure), Politically decentralized (not controlled by a single entity), Don't trust, verify (everything is verifiable) | Taking back control of personal data, Inability to forge or censor content, No surveillance or tracking, Inability to shut down Web apps, Sharing economy of storage and computing, Inability to block or revoke domain names, Eliminating "filter bubbles" in social media | P2P communication protocols (e.g. Matrix, SSB), Content-addressable storage (e.g. Dat, IPFS), P2P file sharing (e.g. Bittorrent), Decentralized DNS (e.g. ENS, Handshake), Privacy-focused networking (e.g. Tor, i2p), Decentralized identity (e.g. DID, 3Box), Data-ownership protocols (e.g. Solid), Mesh networking (e.g. Yggdrasil, Cjdns), Universal computing engine (WebAssembly), Linked data (RDF, Semantic Web), Ad-free browsers (e.g. Brave, Beaker), Data synchronization protocols (e.g. Braid), Decentralized access control (e.g. Nucypher), Code collaboration (e.g. Radicle) | Useful for decentralized currency and payments | IPFS, Dat, ZeroNet | Values and mission, Security, Interoperability | Hard to understand how to apply to my use cases, Hard to integrate techs with each other, Hard to scale | Immaturity of the new tech, Not enough $$ funding, Inability to connect peers behind NAT, Incompatibility of new protocols, Slow adoption of IPv6, We need to redesign or fix low-level protocols first | Tool/protocol for developers | Launched | Just started | Ideological reasons, Technical reasons, Economic reasons | Scaling to many peers, Connecting peers, Access control, Bandwidth optimization, Spam prevention | MIT | No money extraction | over 10 | I can’t estimate the audience | Onboarding and educating new users is hard | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
37 | Huge personal data leaks, Censorship and access restriction by tech giants, Censorship and access restriction by governments | Data sovereignty (control to user), Tech resilience (from disruptive events or shut down by governments), Data authenticity (unforgeable, incorruptible data) | None of the above | Resource addressing layer: DNS | Architecturally decentralized (no infrastructural central point of failure), Politically decentralized (not controlled by a single entity), Don't trust, verify (everything is verifiable) | Inability to forge or censor content, Inability to shut down Web apps | Useful for digital certificates | IPFS, Ethereum, Radicle | DWeb is not understood by general user, Tech giants resistance, Inability to connect peers behind NAT | Tool/protocol for developers | Launched | 3+ years | Ideological reasons, Technical reasons | Scaling to many peers, Connecting peers | Apache 2.0 | No money extraction | Self-funded | Just me | 100 - 1000 | The overall number of DWeb users is limited | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
38 | Censorship and access restriction by governments | Data sovereignty (control to user) | Decent experience in offline by default | Resource addressing layer: DNS | Architecturally decentralized (no infrastructural central point of failure), Politically decentralized (not controlled by a single entity), Logically decentralized (not a single software monolith) | Inability to forge or censor content, Sharing economy of storage and computing, Inability to block or revoke domain names, Better compatibility of apps | P2P communication protocols (e.g. Matrix, SSB), Content-addressable storage (e.g. Dat, IPFS), P2P file sharing (e.g. Bittorrent), Decentralized DNS (e.g. ENS, Handshake), Privacy-focused networking (e.g. Tor, i2p), Decentralized identity (e.g. DID, 3Box), Data-ownership protocols (e.g. Solid), Universal computing engine (WebAssembly), P2P databases (e.g. Gun, OrbitDB), Linked data (RDF, Semantic Web), Data synchronization protocols (e.g. Braid), CRDTs (e.g. Automerge), Local-first frameworks (e.g. Textile) | Useful for decentralized currency and payments, Useful for decentralized identity, Useful for lots of other tasks related to DWeb | I haven't tried building with the DWeb tech | Hard to understand how to apply to my use cases, Hard to integrate techs with each other | DWeb is not understood by general user, Immaturity of the new tech, Tech giants resistance, We need to redesign or fix low-level protocols first | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
39 | Huge personal data leaks, Censorship and access restriction by tech giants, Censorship and access restriction by governments, Ads based on personal data, User data held by applications, No anonymous access to resources and apps | Data sovereignty (control to user), Data privacy (more anonymity), Tech resilience (from disruptive events or shut down by governments), Security (cryptographic signatures everywhere), Network anonymity (private access to resources), Data authenticity (unforgeable, incorruptible data) | Native user identity, Decent experience in offline by default, Native user authentication | Resource addressing layer: DNS, Network layer: IPv4, IPv6 | Architecturally decentralized (no infrastructural central point of failure), Politically decentralized (not controlled by a single entity), Logically decentralized (not a single software monolith), Don't trust, verify (everything is verifiable) | Taking back control of personal data, Inability to forge or censor content, No surveillance or tracking, Inability to block or revoke domain names | P2P communication protocols (e.g. Matrix, SSB), Privacy-focused networking (e.g. Tor, i2p), Decentralized identity (e.g. DID, 3Box), Blockchain (e.g. Ethereum) | Useful for decentralized identity, Useful for lots of other tasks related to DWeb, Useful for digital certificates | Values and mission, Security, Community & Support, Interoperability, Documentation | Hard to scale | Tech giants resistance | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
40 | Huge personal data leaks, Censorship and access restriction by tech giants, Censorship and access restriction by governments | Data sovereignty (control to user), Tech resilience (from disruptive events or shut down by governments), Security (cryptographic signatures everywhere) | Communication layer: SMTP, XMPP, IRC, HTTP layer | Architecturally decentralized (no infrastructural central point of failure), Politically decentralized (not controlled by a single entity) | Taking back control of personal data, Inability to forge or censor content, Eliminating "filter bubbles" in social media | Not a silver bullet, Useful for decentralized currency and payments, Useful for decentralized identity | I haven't tried building with the DWeb tech | Lack of documentation, tutorial, videos and other learning resources | DWeb is not understood by general user | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
41 | Huge personal data leaks, Censorship and access restriction by tech giants, Censorship and access restriction by governments, Ads based on personal data, User data held by applications, No anonymous access to resources and apps, , Web apps are too sensitive to the connection quality, | Data sovereignty (control to user), Data privacy (more anonymity), Tech resilience (from disruptive events or shut down by governments), Network anonymity (private access to resources), Data authenticity (unforgeable, incorruptible data) | None of the above | Resource addressing layer: DNS, Communication layer: SMTP, XMPP, IRC, HTTP layer | Architecturally decentralized (no infrastructural central point of failure), Politically decentralized (not controlled by a single entity), Logically decentralized (not a single software monolith), Don't trust, verify (everything is verifiable) | Inability to forge or censor content, Inability to shut down Web apps, Inability to block or revoke domain names, Eliminating "filter bubbles" in social media | Decentralized DNS (e.g. ENS, Handshake), Privacy-focused networking (e.g. Tor, i2p) | Not a silver bullet | I haven't tried building with the DWeb tech | Hard to integrate techs with each other | DWeb is not understood by general user, Tech giants resistance | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
42 | Huge personal data leaks, Censorship and access restriction by tech giants, Censorship and access restriction by governments, Ads based on personal data, User data held by applications, No anonymous access to resources and apps | Data sovereignty (control to user), Tech resilience (from disruptive events or shut down by governments), Security (cryptographic signatures everywhere), Network anonymity (private access to resources), Data authenticity (unforgeable, incorruptible data) | Native personal data layer, Native user identity, Native user authentication, Native storage layer, Native payment layer | Resource addressing layer: DNS, HTTP layer, Security layer: TLS / SSL | Architecturally decentralized (no infrastructural central point of failure), Logically decentralized (not a single software monolith), Don't trust, verify (everything is verifiable) | Taking back control of personal data, Inability to forge or censor content, Inability to shut down Web apps, Sharing economy of storage and computing, Inability to block or revoke domain names, Eliminating "filter bubbles" in social media | Content-addressable storage (e.g. Dat, IPFS), P2P file sharing (e.g. Bittorrent), Decentralized DNS (e.g. ENS, Handshake), Linked data (RDF, Semantic Web), Ad-free browsers (e.g. Brave, Beaker), Data synchronization protocols (e.g. Braid), Code collaboration (e.g. Radicle) | Not a silver bullet | I haven't tried building with the DWeb tech | Hard to understand how to apply to my use cases, Hard to integrate techs with each other, Hard to get help/community support | DWeb is not understood by general user, Tech giants resistance, Inability to connect peers behind NAT | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
43 | Censorship and access restriction by tech giants, Censorship and access restriction by governments, Ads based on personal data, User data held by applications, No anonymous access to resources and apps, , Web apps are too sensitive to the connection quality | Data sovereignty (control to user), Data privacy (more anonymity), Tech resilience (from disruptive events or shut down by governments), Security (cryptographic signatures everywhere), Network anonymity (private access to resources), Data authenticity (unforgeable, incorruptible data) | Native personal data layer, Decent experience in offline by default, Native synchronization layer (e.g. pub/sub), Native storage layer, Native computing layer | Resource addressing layer: DNS, Network layer: IPv4, IPv6 | Architecturally decentralized (no infrastructural central point of failure) | Sharing economy of storage and computing | P2P communication protocols (e.g. Matrix, SSB), Content-addressable storage (e.g. Dat, IPFS), P2P file sharing (e.g. Bittorrent), Decentralized DNS (e.g. ENS, Handshake), Privacy-focused networking (e.g. Tor, i2p), Decentralized identity (e.g. DID, 3Box), Data-ownership protocols (e.g. Solid), Mesh networking (e.g. Yggdrasil, Cjdns), Universal computing engine (WebAssembly), Blockchain (e.g. Ethereum), P2P databases (e.g. Gun, OrbitDB), Linked data (RDF, Semantic Web), Ad-free browsers (e.g. Brave, Beaker), Data synchronization protocols (e.g. Braid), CRDTs (e.g. Automerge), Local-first frameworks (e.g. Textile), Decentralized access control (e.g. Nucypher), Code collaboration (e.g. Radicle) | Useful for decentralized currency and payments, Useful for decentralized identity, Useful for lots of other tasks related to DWeb, Useful for digital certificates | I haven't tried building with the DWeb tech | None of these, everything is perfect! | DWeb is not understood by general user, Tech giants resistance, Inability to connect peers behind NAT, We need to redesign or fix low-level protocols first | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
44 | Huge personal data leaks, Censorship and access restriction by tech giants, Censorship and access restriction by governments, No anonymous access to resources and apps | Data sovereignty (control to user) | None of the above | Resource addressing layer: DNS | Politically decentralized (not controlled by a single entity) | Taking back control of personal data, No surveillance or tracking, Inability to block or revoke domain names, Eliminating "filter bubbles" in social media | P2P file sharing (e.g. Bittorrent), Privacy-focused networking (e.g. Tor, i2p), Data-ownership protocols (e.g. Solid) | Not a silver bullet | I haven't tried building with the DWeb tech | DWeb is not understood by general user, Tech giants resistance | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
45 | Huge personal data leaks, Censorship and access restriction by tech giants, Censorship and access restriction by governments | Data sovereignty (control to user), Data privacy (more anonymity), Security (cryptographic signatures everywhere), Data authenticity (unforgeable, incorruptible data) | Native personal data layer, Decent experience in offline by default, Native user authentication | Communication layer: SMTP, XMPP, IRC, HTTP layer, Low-level transport layer: TCP, UDP | Politically decentralized (not controlled by a single entity), Don't trust, verify (everything is verifiable) | Taking back control of personal data, Inability to forge or censor content, No surveillance or tracking, Eliminating "filter bubbles" in social media | P2P communication protocols (e.g. Matrix, SSB), P2P file sharing (e.g. Bittorrent), Decentralized identity (e.g. DID, 3Box), Data-ownership protocols (e.g. Solid), P2P databases (e.g. Gun, OrbitDB), Data synchronization protocols (e.g. Braid), CRDTs (e.g. Automerge), Local-first frameworks (e.g. Textile) | Not a silver bullet, Useful for digital certificates | I haven't tried building with the DWeb tech | Immaturity of the new tech, Tech giants resistance, Inability to connect peers behind NAT, Slow adoption of IPv6, We need to redesign or fix low-level protocols first | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
46 | Data sovereignty (control to user), Tech resilience (from disruptive events or shut down by governments), Tech efficiency (better performance, smoother UX) | None of the above | Architecturally decentralized (no infrastructural central point of failure) | Sharing economy of storage and computing | Not a silver bullet, Useful for lots of other tasks related to DWeb | I haven't tried building with the DWeb tech | There is no working business model, Bad UX of DWeb products | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
47 | Huge personal data leaks, Censorship and access restriction by tech giants, Censorship and access restriction by governments, Ads based on personal data, No anonymous access to resources and apps | Data privacy (more anonymity), Tech resilience (from disruptive events or shut down by governments), Security (cryptographic signatures everywhere), Network anonymity (private access to resources) | Decent experience in offline by default, Native synchronization layer (e.g. pub/sub), Native storage layer, Native computing layer | Resource addressing layer: DNS, Resource publishing layer: Atom / RSS, Low-level transport layer: TCP, UDP | Architecturally decentralized (no infrastructural central point of failure), Politically decentralized (not controlled by a single entity), Don't trust, verify (everything is verifiable) | Inability to forge or censor content, Inability to shut down Web apps, Inability to block or revoke domain names | P2P communication protocols (e.g. Matrix, SSB), Content-addressable storage (e.g. Dat, IPFS), P2P file sharing (e.g. Bittorrent), Decentralized DNS (e.g. ENS, Handshake), Privacy-focused networking (e.g. Tor, i2p), Mesh networking (e.g. Yggdrasil, Cjdns), Universal computing engine (WebAssembly), Blockchain (e.g. Ethereum), P2P databases (e.g. Gun, OrbitDB), CRDTs (e.g. Automerge) | Not a silver bullet, Useful for decentralized currency and payments, Useful for digital certificates | I haven't tried building with the DWeb tech | Hard to scale | DWeb is not understood by general user, There is no working business model, Inability to connect peers behind NAT, Slow adoption of IPv6 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
48 | Huge personal data leaks, Censorship and access restriction by tech giants, Censorship and access restriction by governments, Ads based on personal data, User data held by applications | Data sovereignty (control to user), Data privacy (more anonymity), Tech resilience (from disruptive events or shut down by governments), Security (cryptographic signatures everywhere), Tech efficiency (better performance, smoother UX) | Native personal data layer, Native user identity, Native user authentication, Native storage layer, Native payment layer | Resource addressing layer: DNS, Communication layer: SMTP, XMPP, IRC | Architecturally decentralized (no infrastructural central point of failure), Politically decentralized (not controlled by a single entity) | Taking back control of personal data, No surveillance or tracking, Eliminating "filter bubbles" in social media | P2P communication protocols (e.g. Matrix, SSB), Content-addressable storage (e.g. Dat, IPFS), Mesh networking (e.g. Yggdrasil, Cjdns), Universal computing engine (WebAssembly), Data synchronization protocols (e.g. Braid), CRDTs (e.g. Automerge) | Not a silver bullet, Useful for decentralized currency and payments, Waste of time | Libp2p | Values and mission, Community & Support | Lack of documentation, tutorial, videos and other learning resources, It just doesn't work | DWeb is not understood by general user, Immaturity of the new tech, Lack of integration with Web browsers, Bad UX of DWeb products | Tool/protocol for developers | Launched | 3+ years | Ideological reasons, Technical reasons | Spam prevention | Apache 2.0 | VC / Angel | over 10 | 100 000+ | Onboarding and educating new users is hard | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
49 | Huge personal data leaks, Censorship and access restriction by governments, Ads based on personal data, Web apps are too sensitive to the connection quality | Data sovereignty (control to user), Data privacy (more anonymity), Security (cryptographic signatures everywhere) | Native personal data layer, Decent experience in offline by default, Native synchronization layer (e.g. pub/sub), Native payment layer | Resource addressing layer: DNS, HTTP layer, Security layer: TLS / SSL | Don't trust, verify (everything is verifiable) | Taking back control of personal data, Inability to forge or censor content, No surveillance or tracking, Sharing economy of storage and computing | Content-addressable storage (e.g. Dat, IPFS), P2P file sharing (e.g. Bittorrent), Decentralized DNS (e.g. ENS, Handshake), Privacy-focused networking (e.g. Tor, i2p), Decentralized identity (e.g. DID, 3Box), Data-ownership protocols (e.g. Solid), Blockchain (e.g. Ethereum), P2P databases (e.g. Gun, OrbitDB), Ad-free browsers (e.g. Brave, Beaker), Data synchronization protocols (e.g. Braid) | Useful for decentralized currency and payments, Useful for lots of other tasks related to DWeb | I haven't tried building with the DWeb tech | DWeb is not understood by general user, Immaturity of the new tech, Lack of integration with Web browsers, There is no working business model, Not enough $$ funding, Inability to connect peers behind NAT | Tool/protocol for developers | Launched | 3+ years | Ideological reasons | Connecting peers, Keeping connection stability, Achieving performance on device, Access control | MIT | Will figure out in the future | Self-funded | 2-5 | 100 000+ | Not enough marketing budget | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
50 | Huge personal data leaks | Data authenticity (unforgeable, incorruptible data) | Native user identity, Decent experience in offline by default, Native user authentication | Communication layer: SMTP, XMPP, IRC, Resource publishing layer: Atom / RSS, Security layer: TLS / SSL | Architecturally decentralized (no infrastructural central point of failure), Logically decentralized (not a single software monolith) | Useful for decentralized identity | I haven't tried building with the DWeb tech | Lack of documentation, tutorial, videos and other learning resources, Hard to understand how to apply to my use cases | DWeb is not understood by general user, Lack of integration with Web browsers, There is no working business model | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
51 | Huge personal data leaks, Censorship and access restriction by tech giants, Ads based on personal data, No anonymous access to resources and apps, , Web apps are too sensitive to the connection quality | Data sovereignty (control to user) | Native personal data layer, Decent experience in offline by default | Resource addressing layer: DNS, HTTP layer | Architecturally decentralized (no infrastructural central point of failure), Don't trust, verify (everything is verifiable) | Taking back control of personal data, Inability to forge or censor content, Sharing economy of storage and computing | P2P communication protocols (e.g. Matrix, SSB), Content-addressable storage (e.g. Dat, IPFS), P2P file sharing (e.g. Bittorrent), Privacy-focused networking (e.g. Tor, i2p), Mesh networking (e.g. Yggdrasil, Cjdns) | Useful for decentralized currency and payments, Useful for digital certificates | IPFS | Values and mission, Community & Support, Scalability | Lack of documentation, tutorial, videos and other learning resources, Hard to integrate techs with each other | Immaturity of the new tech, Lack of integration with Web browsers, Bad UX of DWeb products, Incompatibility of new protocols | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
52 | Huge personal data leaks, Censorship and access restriction by tech giants, Censorship and access restriction by governments, Ads based on personal data, User data held by applications, No anonymous access to resources and apps, , Web apps are too sensitive to the connection quality, | Data privacy (more anonymity), Network anonymity (private access to resources), Data authenticity (unforgeable, incorruptible data) | Native personal data layer, Native user identity, Native user authentication, Native synchronization layer (e.g. pub/sub), Native storage layer | Resource addressing layer: DNS, Communication layer: SMTP, XMPP, IRC, Resource publishing layer: Atom / RSS | Taking back control of personal data | Content-addressable storage (e.g. Dat, IPFS), P2P file sharing (e.g. Bittorrent), Decentralized DNS (e.g. ENS, Handshake), Decentralized identity (e.g. DID, 3Box), CRDTs (e.g. Automerge), Local-first frameworks (e.g. Textile) | IPFS, Ethereum, Textile | Interoperability, Performance, Documentation, Ease of use | Hard to scale | DWeb is not understood by general user, Immaturity of the new tech, Lack of integration with Web browsers, There is no working business model, Not enough $$ funding | Tool/protocol for developers | Under development | 1-2 years | Ideological reasons | Scaling to many peers, Connecting peers, Keeping connection stability, Bandwidth optimization, Just UX | MIT, Apache 2.0 | I don't know | VC / Angel | over 10 | 10 000 - 100 000 | The overall number of DWeb users is limited | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
53 | Ads based on personal data, User data held by applications, No anonymous access to resources and apps, | Data sovereignty (control to user), Data privacy (more anonymity), Tech resilience (from disruptive events or shut down by governments), Tech efficiency (better performance, smoother UX) | Native personal data layer, Decent experience in offline by default, Native payment layer | Communication layer: SMTP, XMPP, IRC | Architecturally decentralized (no infrastructural central point of failure), Don't trust, verify (everything is verifiable) | Taking back control of personal data, Inability to forge or censor content, No surveillance or tracking | Decentralized identity (e.g. DID, 3Box), Data-ownership protocols (e.g. Solid), Data synchronization protocols (e.g. Braid), Decentralized access control (e.g. Nucypher) | Waste of time | I haven't tried building with the DWeb tech | Hard to understand how to apply to my use cases | Immaturity of the new tech, There is no working business model | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
54 | Huge personal data leaks, Censorship and access restriction by tech giants, Censorship and access restriction by governments, Ads based on personal data, Web apps are too sensitive to the connection quality | Data privacy (more anonymity), Tech resilience (from disruptive events or shut down by governments), Security (cryptographic signatures everywhere), Data authenticity (unforgeable, incorruptible data), Tech efficiency (better performance, smoother UX) | Native personal data layer, Decent experience in offline by default, Native user authentication, Native storage layer | Resource addressing layer: DNS, Communication layer: SMTP, XMPP, IRC, Network layer: IPv4, IPv6 | Architecturally decentralized (no infrastructural central point of failure), Politically decentralized (not controlled by a single entity), Logically decentralized (not a single software monolith), Don't trust, verify (everything is verifiable) | Taking back control of personal data, Inability to forge or censor content, No surveillance or tracking, Inability to shut down Web apps, Sharing economy of storage and computing, Inability to block or revoke domain names | Content-addressable storage (e.g. Dat, IPFS), P2P file sharing (e.g. Bittorrent), Privacy-focused networking (e.g. Tor, i2p), Decentralized identity (e.g. DID, 3Box), Data-ownership protocols (e.g. Solid), Universal computing engine (WebAssembly), Blockchain (e.g. Ethereum), Ad-free browsers (e.g. Brave, Beaker) | Useful for decentralized currency and payments, Useful for decentralized identity, Useful for lots of other tasks related to DWeb, Useful for digital certificates | IPFS, Ethereum, Dat, Libp2p | Security, Community & Support, Performance | Lack of documentation, tutorial, videos and other learning resources, Hard to understand how to apply to my use cases, Hard to get help/community support | Tool/protocol for developers | Under development | < 6 months | Ideological reasons, Technical reasons, Economic reasons, Legal reasons | Connecting peers, Keeping connection stability, Access control | Haven’t decided license yet | Will figure out in the future | Self-funded | 2-5 | Under 100 | My project is not mature enough | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
55 | Huge personal data leaks, Censorship and access restriction by tech giants, Ads based on personal data, User data held by applications | Data sovereignty (control to user), Tech resilience (from disruptive events or shut down by governments), Network anonymity (private access to resources) | Native personal data layer, Native user identity, Decent experience in offline by default, Native user authentication | Resource addressing layer: DNS, Security layer: TLS / SSL, Network layer: IPv4, IPv6, Low-level transport layer: TCP, UDP | Politically decentralized (not controlled by a single entity) | Taking back control of personal data, No surveillance or tracking, Sharing economy of storage and computing, Eliminating "filter bubbles" in social media | Waste of time | I haven't tried building with the DWeb tech | DWeb is not understood by general user, Immaturity of the new tech, Tech giants resistance, Bad UX of DWeb products, Inability to connect peers behind NAT | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
56 | Huge personal data leaks, Censorship and access restriction by tech giants, Censorship and access restriction by governments, Ads based on personal data, No anonymous access to resources and apps, | Data sovereignty (control to user), Security (cryptographic signatures everywhere), Network anonymity (private access to resources), Tech efficiency (better performance, smoother UX) | Decent experience in offline by default, Native synchronization layer (e.g. pub/sub), Native storage layer, Native payment layer | Resource addressing layer: DNS, Communication layer: SMTP, XMPP, IRC, HTTP layer, Resource publishing layer: Atom / RSS | Architecturally decentralized (no infrastructural central point of failure) | Taking back control of personal data, Sharing economy of storage and computing, Better compatibility of apps | Content-addressable storage (e.g. Dat, IPFS), P2P databases (e.g. Gun, OrbitDB), CRDTs (e.g. Automerge), Code collaboration (e.g. Radicle) | Not a silver bullet | IPFS, OrbitDB | Values and mission, Interoperability | Lack of documentation, tutorial, videos and other learning resources, Hard to understand how to apply to my use cases | DWeb is not understood by general user, Immaturity of the new tech, Tech giants resistance, Lack of integration with Web browsers | App for end-users | Under development | < 3 months | Ideological reasons, Technical reasons, Economic reasons, Legal reasons | Making underlying DWeb tech work, Connecting peers | AGPL 3.0 | No money extraction | Self-funded | Just me | Not launched yet | My project is not mature enough | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
57 | Huge personal data leaks, Ads based on personal data, User data held by applications, No anonymous access to resources and apps, | Data sovereignty (control to user) | Decent experience in offline by default | HTTP layer | Architecturally decentralized (no infrastructural central point of failure), Don't trust, verify (everything is verifiable) | Taking back control of personal data, Inability to forge or censor content, No surveillance or tracking, Sharing economy of storage and computing, Better compatibility of apps | P2P communication protocols (e.g. Matrix, SSB), Linked data (RDF, Semantic Web) | Not a silver bullet, Useful for decentralized currency and payments, Useful for decentralized identity | WebTorrent | Values and mission, Security, Interoperability, Scalability | Lack of documentation, tutorial, videos and other learning resources, Hard to get help/community support | DWeb is not understood by general user, Tech giants resistance | App for end-users | Launched | 1-2 years | Ideological reasons, Technical reasons, Economic reasons | Keeping connection stability, Achieving performance on device, Bandwidth optimization, Spam prevention | AGPL 3.0 | No money extraction | Self-funded | 2-5 | 100 - 1000 | The overall number of DWeb users is limited | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
58 | Huge personal data leaks, Censorship and access restriction by governments, Ads based on personal data, No anonymous access to resources and apps | Data privacy (more anonymity), Security (cryptographic signatures everywhere), Network anonymity (private access to resources), Data authenticity (unforgeable, incorruptible data) | None of the above | Network layer: IPv4, IPv6, Low-level transport layer: TCP, UDP | Architecturally decentralized (no infrastructural central point of failure), Logically decentralized (not a single software monolith) | Taking back control of personal data, Inability to forge or censor content, Sharing economy of storage and computing | Content-addressable storage (e.g. Dat, IPFS), P2P file sharing (e.g. Bittorrent), Decentralized DNS (e.g. ENS, Handshake), Decentralized identity (e.g. DID, 3Box), Mesh networking (e.g. Yggdrasil, Cjdns), Data synchronization protocols (e.g. Braid), CRDTs (e.g. Automerge) | Waste of time | IPFS | Security, Interoperability, Scalability | Lack of documentation, tutorial, videos and other learning resources, Hard to understand how to apply to my use cases, Hard to integrate techs with each other, Hard to scale | There is no working business model, Not enough $$ funding, Inability to connect peers behind NAT, Slow adoption of IPv6, We need to redesign or fix low-level protocols first | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
59 | Huge personal data leaks, Censorship and access restriction by tech giants, Censorship and access restriction by governments, Ads based on personal data, No anonymous access to resources and apps | Data sovereignty (control to user), Tech resilience (from disruptive events or shut down by governments), Network anonymity (private access to resources), Data authenticity (unforgeable, incorruptible data) | Native personal data layer, Native user identity, Decent experience in offline by default, Native user authentication, Native synchronization layer (e.g. pub/sub), Native storage layer, Native payment layer, Native computing layer | Resource addressing layer: DNS, Communication layer: SMTP, XMPP, IRC, HTTP layer | Architecturally decentralized (no infrastructural central point of failure), Politically decentralized (not controlled by a single entity), Logically decentralized (not a single software monolith) | Taking back control of personal data, Inability to forge or censor content, No surveillance or tracking, Better compatibility of apps | P2P communication protocols (e.g. Matrix, SSB), Content-addressable storage (e.g. Dat, IPFS), P2P file sharing (e.g. Bittorrent), Decentralized DNS (e.g. ENS, Handshake), Privacy-focused networking (e.g. Tor, i2p), Decentralized identity (e.g. DID, 3Box), Data-ownership protocols (e.g. Solid), P2P databases (e.g. Gun, OrbitDB), Local-first frameworks (e.g. Textile), Decentralized access control (e.g. Nucypher) | Not a silver bullet, Useful for decentralized currency and payments, Useful for decentralized identity, Useful for digital certificates | I haven't tried building with the DWeb tech | DWeb is not understood by general user, Immaturity of the new tech, Tech giants resistance, Lack of integration with Web browsers, There is no working business model, Not enough $$ funding, Incompatibility of new protocols, Slow adoption of IPv6 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
60 | Censorship and access restriction by governments, Ads based on personal data, User data held by applications | Data sovereignty (control to user), Data privacy (more anonymity), Tech efficiency (better performance, smoother UX) | Native personal data layer, Native user identity | Resource addressing layer: DNS, Communication layer: SMTP, XMPP, IRC | Politically decentralized (not controlled by a single entity) | Taking back control of personal data, Sharing economy of storage and computing, Better compatibility of apps | Data-ownership protocols (e.g. Solid) | Waste of time | Solid | Values and mission | Hard to understand how to apply to my use cases | Lack of integration with Web browsers, There is no working business model, Bad UX of DWeb products | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
61 | Huge personal data leaks, Censorship and access restriction by tech giants, Censorship and access restriction by governments, User data held by applications, No anonymous access to resources and apps | Data sovereignty (control to user), Data privacy (more anonymity), Tech resilience (from disruptive events or shut down by governments), Security (cryptographic signatures everywhere), Network anonymity (private access to resources), Data authenticity (unforgeable, incorruptible data) | Native personal data layer, Native storage layer, Native payment layer | Resource addressing layer: DNS, HTTP layer | Architecturally decentralized (no infrastructural central point of failure), Politically decentralized (not controlled by a single entity), Logically decentralized (not a single software monolith), Don't trust, verify (everything is verifiable) | Taking back control of personal data, Inability to forge or censor content, No surveillance or tracking, Sharing economy of storage and computing, Inability to block or revoke domain names, Eliminating "filter bubbles" in social media | P2P communication protocols (e.g. Matrix, SSB), Content-addressable storage (e.g. Dat, IPFS), P2P file sharing (e.g. Bittorrent), Privacy-focused networking (e.g. Tor, i2p), Decentralized identity (e.g. DID, 3Box), Data-ownership protocols (e.g. Solid), Universal computing engine (WebAssembly), P2P databases (e.g. Gun, OrbitDB), Linked data (RDF, Semantic Web), Decentralized access control (e.g. Nucypher) | Not a silver bullet | IPFS, Other blockchain | Values and mission, Security, Community & Support, Interoperability, Scalability | DWeb is not understood by general user, Immaturity of the new tech, There is no working business model, Not enough $$ funding | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
62 | Huge personal data leaks, Censorship and access restriction by tech giants, Censorship and access restriction by governments, Ads based on personal data, User data held by applications, No anonymous access to resources and apps, , Web apps are too sensitive to the connection quality, | Data sovereignty (control to user), Data privacy (more anonymity), Security (cryptographic signatures everywhere), Tech efficiency (better performance, smoother UX) | Native personal data layer, Native storage layer, Native computing layer | Resource addressing layer: DNS, Security layer: TLS / SSL, Low-level transport layer: TCP, UDP | Architecturally decentralized (no infrastructural central point of failure), Politically decentralized (not controlled by a single entity) | Taking back control of personal data, Inability to forge or censor content, Inability to shut down Web apps, Sharing economy of storage and computing, Inability to block or revoke domain names | P2P communication protocols (e.g. Matrix, SSB), Content-addressable storage (e.g. Dat, IPFS), P2P file sharing (e.g. Bittorrent), Blockchain (e.g. Ethereum), Ad-free browsers (e.g. Brave, Beaker) | Not a silver bullet, Useful for decentralized currency and payments, Useful for decentralized identity, Useful for digital certificates | IPFS | Security, Ease of use | Lack of documentation, tutorial, videos and other learning resources | Immaturity of the new tech, Lack of integration with Web browsers, Not enough $$ funding, Bad UX of DWeb products, Inability to connect peers behind NAT, Slow adoption of IPv6 | App for end-users | Ideological reasons, Economic reasons, Legal reasons | Scaling to many peers, Connecting peers, Keeping connection stability | MIT | Will figure out in the future | Self-funded | Just me | Under 100 | My project is not mature enough | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
63 | Censorship and access restriction by tech giants, Censorship and access restriction by governments, No anonymous access to resources and apps | Data sovereignty (control to user), Data privacy (more anonymity), Security (cryptographic signatures everywhere), Network anonymity (private access to resources), Data authenticity (unforgeable, incorruptible data) | Native personal data layer, Native storage layer | Architecturally decentralized (no infrastructural central point of failure) | Inability to forge or censor content, No surveillance or tracking, Inability to shut down Web apps, Inability to block or revoke domain names | Content-addressable storage (e.g. Dat, IPFS), P2P file sharing (e.g. Bittorrent), Privacy-focused networking (e.g. Tor, i2p), Universal computing engine (WebAssembly), Blockchain (e.g. Ethereum), P2P databases (e.g. Gun, OrbitDB) | Not a silver bullet, Useful for decentralized currency and payments, Useful for lots of other tasks related to DWeb | Libp2p, ZeroNet, Gun | Values and mission | Hard to understand how to apply to my use cases, Hard to integrate techs with each other, Hard to get help/community support | Immaturity of the new tech | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
64 | Huge personal data leaks, Censorship and access restriction by tech giants, Censorship and access restriction by governments, Ads based on personal data, User data held by applications, No anonymous access to resources and apps | Data sovereignty (control to user), Data privacy (more anonymity), Tech resilience (from disruptive events or shut down by governments), Security (cryptographic signatures everywhere), Network anonymity (private access to resources) | Native user identity | Communication layer: SMTP, XMPP, IRC | Architecturally decentralized (no infrastructural central point of failure), Politically decentralized (not controlled by a single entity), Logically decentralized (not a single software monolith), Don't trust, verify (everything is verifiable) | Taking back control of personal data, Inability to forge or censor content, No surveillance or tracking, Inability to shut down Web apps, Inability to block or revoke domain names, Eliminating "filter bubbles" in social media | Decentralized identity (e.g. DID, 3Box), Ad-free browsers (e.g. Brave, Beaker), Decentralized access control (e.g. Nucypher) | Not a silver bullet, Useful for decentralized currency and payments, Useful for lots of other tasks related to DWeb, Useful for digital certificates | I haven't tried building with the DWeb tech | Lack of documentation, tutorial, videos and other learning resources, Hard to understand how to apply to my use cases, Hard to integrate techs with each other, Hard to scale | Immaturity of the new tech, Tech giants resistance, Lack of integration with Web browsers, Not enough $$ funding, Slow adoption of IPv6, We need to redesign or fix low-level protocols first | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
65 | Censorship and access restriction by tech giants, Censorship and access restriction by governments, Ads based on personal data | Data sovereignty (control to user), Data privacy (more anonymity) | Native user authentication, Native synchronization layer (e.g. pub/sub) | Resource addressing layer: DNS | Architecturally decentralized (no infrastructural central point of failure), Politically decentralized (not controlled by a single entity), Logically decentralized (not a single software monolith) | Inability to shut down Web apps, Inability to block or revoke domain names, Better compatibility of apps | P2P communication protocols (e.g. Matrix, SSB), Content-addressable storage (e.g. Dat, IPFS), P2P file sharing (e.g. Bittorrent), Decentralized DNS (e.g. ENS, Handshake), Privacy-focused networking (e.g. Tor, i2p), Data-ownership protocols (e.g. Solid), Mesh networking (e.g. Yggdrasil, Cjdns), Blockchain (e.g. Ethereum), P2P databases (e.g. Gun, OrbitDB), Linked data (RDF, Semantic Web), Ad-free browsers (e.g. Brave, Beaker), Data synchronization protocols (e.g. Braid) | Not a silver bullet, Useful for decentralized currency and payments, Useful for decentralized identity, Useful for lots of other tasks related to DWeb, Useful for digital certificates | WebTorrent, Other blockchain | Values and mission | Lack of documentation, tutorial, videos and other learning resources | DWeb is not understood by general user | Launched | 3+ years | Ideological reasons | Scaling to many peers, Bandwidth optimization, Spam prevention | AGPL 3.0 | No money extraction | Self-funded | 6-10 | 1000 - 10 000 | My project is not mature enough, Not enough marketing budget | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
66 | Censorship and access restriction by governments, Ads based on personal data | Data sovereignty (control to user), Data privacy (more anonymity), Tech resilience (from disruptive events or shut down by governments), Tech efficiency (better performance, smoother UX) | None of the above | Architecturally decentralized (no infrastructural central point of failure), Politically decentralized (not controlled by a single entity), Logically decentralized (not a single software monolith) | Taking back control of personal data, Inability to forge or censor content, No surveillance or tracking, Better compatibility of apps | P2P communication protocols (e.g. Matrix, SSB), Privacy-focused networking (e.g. Tor, i2p), Decentralized identity (e.g. DID, 3Box), Code collaboration (e.g. Radicle) | ActivityPub | Values and mission, Security, Community & Support, Interoperability, Documentation, Ease of use | None of these, everything is perfect! | DWeb is not understood by general user, Tech giants resistance, Bad UX of DWeb products | App for end-users | Launched | 1-2 years | Just UX | Will figure out in the future, Freemium | 6-10 | I can’t estimate the audience | Onboarding and educating new users is hard, The overall number of DWeb users is limited, Not enough marketing budget | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
67 | Huge personal data leaks, Censorship and access restriction by tech giants, Censorship and access restriction by governments, Ads based on personal data, No anonymous access to resources and apps | Data sovereignty (control to user), Data privacy (more anonymity), Tech resilience (from disruptive events or shut down by governments), Security (cryptographic signatures everywhere), Network anonymity (private access to resources) | Native personal data layer, Native user identity, Decent experience in offline by default, Native user authentication, Native synchronization layer (e.g. pub/sub) | Resource addressing layer: DNS, Communication layer: SMTP, XMPP, IRC, HTTP layer, Resource publishing layer: Atom / RSS | Architecturally decentralized (no infrastructural central point of failure), Politically decentralized (not controlled by a single entity), Logically decentralized (not a single software monolith), Don't trust, verify (everything is verifiable) | Taking back control of personal data, Inability to forge or censor content, No surveillance or tracking, Better compatibility of apps, Eliminating "filter bubbles" in social media | P2P communication protocols (e.g. Matrix, SSB), Content-addressable storage (e.g. Dat, IPFS), P2P file sharing (e.g. Bittorrent), Privacy-focused networking (e.g. Tor, i2p), Decentralized identity (e.g. DID, 3Box), Data-ownership protocols (e.g. Solid), Universal computing engine (WebAssembly), Data synchronization protocols (e.g. Braid), CRDTs (e.g. Automerge), Local-first frameworks (e.g. Textile) | Not a silver bullet, Useful for digital certificates | I haven't tried building with the DWeb tech | DWeb is not understood by general user, Tech giants resistance, Lack of integration with Web browsers, There is no working business model, Not enough $$ funding, Bad UX of DWeb products, Inability to connect peers behind NAT, Incompatibility of new protocols, Slow adoption of IPv6 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
68 | Censorship and access restriction by tech giants, Censorship and access restriction by governments, Ads based on personal data, No anonymous access to resources and apps, Web apps are too sensitive to the connection quality | Data privacy (more anonymity), Tech resilience (from disruptive events or shut down by governments), Security (cryptographic signatures everywhere), Network anonymity (private access to resources), Data authenticity (unforgeable, incorruptible data), Tech efficiency (better performance, smoother UX) | Native personal data layer, Decent experience in offline by default, Native user authentication, Native synchronization layer (e.g. pub/sub) | Communication layer: SMTP, XMPP, IRC, HTTP layer, Network layer: IPv4, IPv6 | Architecturally decentralized (no infrastructural central point of failure), Logically decentralized (not a single software monolith) | Taking back control of personal data, No surveillance or tracking, Sharing economy of storage and computing | P2P file sharing (e.g. Bittorrent), Decentralized DNS (e.g. ENS, Handshake), Privacy-focused networking (e.g. Tor, i2p), Decentralized identity (e.g. DID, 3Box), Mesh networking (e.g. Yggdrasil, Cjdns), Universal computing engine (WebAssembly) | Not a silver bullet, Waste of time | Dat, Radicle | Performance | Lack of documentation, tutorial, videos and other learning resources, Hard to integrate techs with each other | DWeb is not understood by general user, Inability to connect peers behind NAT, Slow adoption of IPv6 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
69 | Huge personal data leaks, Censorship and access restriction by tech giants, Censorship and access restriction by governments, Ads based on personal data, User data held by applications, No anonymous access to resources and apps | Data sovereignty (control to user), Data privacy (more anonymity), Tech resilience (from disruptive events or shut down by governments), Network anonymity (private access to resources), Data authenticity (unforgeable, incorruptible data) | Native personal data layer | Resource addressing layer: DNS, HTTP layer, Network layer: IPv4, IPv6, Low-level transport layer: TCP, UDP | Architecturally decentralized (no infrastructural central point of failure) | Taking back control of personal data, No surveillance or tracking | P2P communication protocols (e.g. Matrix, SSB), Content-addressable storage (e.g. Dat, IPFS), P2P file sharing (e.g. Bittorrent), Decentralized DNS (e.g. ENS, Handshake), Mesh networking (e.g. Yggdrasil, Cjdns), Blockchain (e.g. Ethereum), P2P databases (e.g. Gun, OrbitDB), Ad-free browsers (e.g. Brave, Beaker), Code collaboration (e.g. Radicle) | Not a silver bullet, Useful for decentralized currency and payments | I haven't tried building with the DWeb tech, IPFS, Dat, WebTorrent, Secure Scuttlebutt, Blockstack | Hard to scale, Hard to get help/community support | DWeb is not understood by general user, Tech giants resistance, Lack of integration with Web browsers, Not enough $$ funding, Inability to connect peers behind NAT, Slow adoption of IPv6, We need to redesign or fix low-level protocols first | Tool/protocol for developers | Under development | < 1 year | Ideological reasons, Technical reasons | Keeping connection stability, Access control | I don't know | Will figure out in the future | Self-funded | Just me | Not launched yet | My project is not mature enough | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
70 | No anonymous access to resources and apps, Web apps are too sensitive to the connection quality | Network anonymity (private access to resources), Data authenticity (unforgeable, incorruptible data), Tech efficiency (better performance, smoother UX) | Native user identity, Decent experience in offline by default | HTTP layer | Politically decentralized (not controlled by a single entity) | Inability to shut down Web apps, Sharing economy of storage and computing | P2P communication protocols (e.g. Matrix, SSB), Content-addressable storage (e.g. Dat, IPFS), Decentralized DNS (e.g. ENS, Handshake), Decentralized identity (e.g. DID, 3Box), P2P databases (e.g. Gun, OrbitDB) | Not a silver bullet, Useful for digital certificates | Dat, WebTorrent | Values and mission, Scalability | Lack of documentation, tutorial, videos and other learning resources, Hard to understand how to apply to my use cases | DWeb is not understood by general user, Lack of integration with Web browsers, There is no working business model | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
71 | Huge personal data leaks, Censorship and access restriction by tech giants, Ads based on personal data, User data held by applications, No anonymous access to resources and apps, , Web apps are too sensitive to the connection quality | Data sovereignty (control to user), Data privacy (more anonymity), Tech resilience (from disruptive events or shut down by governments), Security (cryptographic signatures everywhere), Network anonymity (private access to resources), Data authenticity (unforgeable, incorruptible data), Tech efficiency (better performance, smoother UX) | Native user identity, Decent experience in offline by default, Native user authentication | Architecturally decentralized (no infrastructural central point of failure), Don't trust, verify (everything is verifiable) | No surveillance or tracking, Eliminating "filter bubbles" in social media | P2P file sharing (e.g. Bittorrent), Privacy-focused networking (e.g. Tor, i2p), Mesh networking (e.g. Yggdrasil, Cjdns) | Not a silver bullet, Waste of time | I haven't tried building with the DWeb tech | Lack of documentation, tutorial, videos and other learning resources, Hard to integrate techs with each other | DWeb is not understood by general user, Lack of integration with Web browsers, There is no working business model, Not enough $$ funding, Bad UX of DWeb products, Inability to connect peers behind NAT, Slow adoption of IPv6 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
72 | Huge personal data leaks, Censorship and access restriction by tech giants, User data held by applications | Tech resilience (from disruptive events or shut down by governments), Data authenticity (unforgeable, incorruptible data) | Native personal data layer, Native user identity, Native user authentication, Native synchronization layer (e.g. pub/sub), Native storage layer | Communication layer: SMTP, XMPP, IRC | Architecturally decentralized (no infrastructural central point of failure) | Inability to forge or censor content, No surveillance or tracking, Inability to shut down Web apps, Inability to block or revoke domain names | Content-addressable storage (e.g. Dat, IPFS), Decentralized DNS (e.g. ENS, Handshake), Data-ownership protocols (e.g. Solid), Blockchain (e.g. Ethereum), Data synchronization protocols (e.g. Braid) | Not a silver bullet, Useful for decentralized currency and payments, Useful for decentralized identity | I haven't tried building with the DWeb tech | Hard to integrate techs with each other | DWeb is not understood by general user, Tech giants resistance, Lack of integration with Web browsers, There is no working business model | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
73 | Huge personal data leaks, Censorship and access restriction by tech giants, Censorship and access restriction by governments, Ads based on personal data, User data held by applications, No anonymous access to resources and apps, | Tech resilience (from disruptive events or shut down by governments) | Native personal data layer, Native user identity, Decent experience in offline by default, Native user authentication, Native synchronization layer (e.g. pub/sub), Native storage layer, Native payment layer, Native computing layer | Network layer: IPv4, IPv6 | Architecturally decentralized (no infrastructural central point of failure) | Taking back control of personal data, Inability to forge or censor content, No surveillance or tracking, Inability to shut down Web apps, Sharing economy of storage and computing, Inability to block or revoke domain names, Better compatibility of apps | Content-addressable storage (e.g. Dat, IPFS), P2P file sharing (e.g. Bittorrent), Decentralized DNS (e.g. ENS, Handshake), Privacy-focused networking (e.g. Tor, i2p), Decentralized identity (e.g. DID, 3Box), Data-ownership protocols (e.g. Solid), Mesh networking (e.g. Yggdrasil, Cjdns), Universal computing engine (WebAssembly), Blockchain (e.g. Ethereum), Ad-free browsers (e.g. Brave, Beaker), Local-first frameworks (e.g. Textile), Decentralized access control (e.g. Nucypher), Code collaboration (e.g. Radicle) | Not a silver bullet, Useful for decentralized currency and payments, Useful for decentralized identity, Useful for lots of other tasks related to DWeb, Useful for digital certificates | IPFS, Secure Scuttlebutt, Solid, Blockstack | Security, Interoperability, Scalability, Documentation | Hard to scale | DWeb is not understood by general user, Immaturity of the new tech, Tech giants resistance, Lack of integration with Web browsers, Inability to connect peers behind NAT, Incompatibility of new protocols, We need to redesign or fix low-level protocols first | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
74 | Huge personal data leaks, Censorship and access restriction by tech giants, Censorship and access restriction by governments, User data held by applications | Data sovereignty (control to user) | Native user identity | Resource addressing layer: DNS, Network layer: IPv4, IPv6 | Politically decentralized (not controlled by a single entity), Don't trust, verify (everything is verifiable) | Taking back control of personal data, Inability to forge or censor content, Inability to shut down Web apps | P2P communication protocols (e.g. Matrix, SSB), Content-addressable storage (e.g. Dat, IPFS), P2P file sharing (e.g. Bittorrent), P2P databases (e.g. Gun, OrbitDB), Linked data (RDF, Semantic Web) | Waste of time | Secure Scuttlebutt, Solid | Values and mission, Community & Support, Scalability | DWeb is not understood by general user, There is no working business model, Not enough $$ funding, Incompatibility of new protocols | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
75 | Huge personal data leaks, Censorship and access restriction by tech giants, Censorship and access restriction by governments | Tech resilience (from disruptive events or shut down by governments) | Decent experience in offline by default, Native user authentication, Native payment layer | Resource addressing layer: DNS | Architecturally decentralized (no infrastructural central point of failure) | Inability to block or revoke domain names | Decentralized DNS (e.g. ENS, Handshake), Ad-free browsers (e.g. Brave, Beaker) | Useful for lots of other tasks related to DWeb | I haven't tried building with the DWeb tech | None of these, everything is perfect! | Immaturity of the new tech | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
76 | No anonymous access to resources and apps | Security (cryptographic signatures everywhere) | None of the above | Resource addressing layer: DNS | Don't trust, verify (everything is verifiable) | Sharing economy of storage and computing | CRDTs (e.g. Automerge), Code collaboration (e.g. Radicle) | Not a silver bullet | IPFS, Ethereum, WebTorrent, Other blockchain | Values and mission | Hard to scale, It just doesn't work | We need to redesign or fix low-level protocols first | App for end-users | Idea / concept | Technical reasons | Making underlying DWeb tech work, Connecting peers, Keeping connection stability | MIT | No money extraction | I don't know | Just me | I don’t want to share | The overall number of DWeb users is limited | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
77 | Huge personal data leaks, Ads based on personal data, User data held by applications | Data sovereignty (control to user), Data privacy (more anonymity), Security (cryptographic signatures everywhere) | Native user identity | Security layer: TLS / SSL, Network layer: IPv4, IPv6 | Architecturally decentralized (no infrastructural central point of failure), Politically decentralized (not controlled by a single entity) | Taking back control of personal data, Inability to forge or censor content, Inability to block or revoke domain names, Better compatibility of apps | P2P file sharing (e.g. Bittorrent), Data-ownership protocols (e.g. Solid), Blockchain (e.g. Ethereum), P2P databases (e.g. Gun, OrbitDB), Linked data (RDF, Semantic Web) | Useful for decentralized currency and payments, Useful for decentralized identity, Useful for digital certificates | Ethereum, Solid | Security, Scalability | Hard to integrate techs with each other | DWeb is not understood by general user, There is no working business model, Incompatibility of new protocols | App for end-users | Under development | 1-2 years | Ideological reasons | Scaling to many peers, Connecting peers | MIT, Apache 2.0 | Will figure out in the future | Just me | Not launched yet | The overall number of DWeb users is limited | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
78 | Data sovereignty (control to user) | Decent experience in offline by default | Low-level transport layer: TCP, UDP | Architecturally decentralized (no infrastructural central point of failure) | Better compatibility of apps | P2P file sharing (e.g. Bittorrent), Decentralized DNS (e.g. ENS, Handshake), Decentralized identity (e.g. DID, 3Box), Mesh networking (e.g. Yggdrasil, Cjdns), Universal computing engine (WebAssembly), Blockchain (e.g. Ethereum), Code collaboration (e.g. Radicle) | Useful for lots of other tasks related to DWeb | IPFS, Ethereum, Other blockchain, Embark (Status) | Security | It just doesn't work | DWeb is not understood by general user, There is no working business model | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
79 | Huge personal data leaks, Censorship and access restriction by tech giants, Censorship and access restriction by governments, Ads based on personal data | Tech resilience (from disruptive events or shut down by governments), Data authenticity (unforgeable, incorruptible data), Tech efficiency (better performance, smoother UX) | Native personal data layer, Native user identity, Native user authentication | Resource addressing layer: DNS, Communication layer: SMTP, XMPP, IRC | Politically decentralized (not controlled by a single entity), Don't trust, verify (everything is verifiable) | Taking back control of personal data, Inability to forge or censor content, Inability to shut down Web apps, Inability to block or revoke domain names | Data-ownership protocols (e.g. Solid), P2P databases (e.g. Gun, OrbitDB), Data synchronization protocols (e.g. Braid), Decentralized access control (e.g. Nucypher) | Useful for decentralized identity, Useful for lots of other tasks related to DWeb | OrbitDB | Values and mission, Documentation | Hard to understand how to apply to my use cases, Hard to integrate techs with each other | DWeb is not understood by general user, Immaturity of the new tech, Tech giants resistance, There is no working business model, Inability to connect peers behind NAT, Slow adoption of IPv6 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
80 | Censorship and access restriction by tech giants, Censorship and access restriction by governments, User data held by applications, Web apps are too sensitive to the connection quality | Data sovereignty (control to user), Tech resilience (from disruptive events or shut down by governments) | Native personal data layer, Decent experience in offline by default, Native synchronization layer (e.g. pub/sub), Native storage layer | Resource publishing layer: Atom / RSS | Architecturally decentralized (no infrastructural central point of failure), Logically decentralized (not a single software monolith) | Inability to shut down Web apps, Sharing economy of storage and computing | Content-addressable storage (e.g. Dat, IPFS), P2P file sharing (e.g. Bittorrent), Data-ownership protocols (e.g. Solid), Universal computing engine (WebAssembly), Linked data (RDF, Semantic Web), CRDTs (e.g. Automerge) | Not a silver bullet, Useful for decentralized currency and payments | IPFS, Dat, Solid | Values and mission, Interoperability, Scalability, Ease of use | DWeb is not understood by general user, There is no working business model, Not enough $$ funding | App for end-users | Under development | 1-2 years | My project is not p2p | Not open-source | Freemium | VC / Angel | 2-5 | Under 100 | My project is not mature enough | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
81 | Huge personal data leaks, Censorship and access restriction by tech giants, Censorship and access restriction by governments, Ads based on personal data, User data held by applications, No anonymous access to resources and apps, Web apps are too sensitive to the connection quality | Data sovereignty (control to user), Data privacy (more anonymity), Security (cryptographic signatures everywhere), Network anonymity (private access to resources) | Native personal data layer, Native user authentication, Native synchronization layer (e.g. pub/sub), Native storage layer | Communication layer: SMTP, XMPP, IRC, HTTP layer, Security layer: TLS / SSL | Architecturally decentralized (no infrastructural central point of failure), Don't trust, verify (everything is verifiable) | Taking back control of personal data, Inability to forge or censor content, No surveillance or tracking, Inability to shut down Web apps, Sharing economy of storage and computing, Inability to block or revoke domain names, Better compatibility of apps | P2P communication protocols (e.g. Matrix, SSB), Content-addressable storage (e.g. Dat, IPFS), P2P file sharing (e.g. Bittorrent), Decentralized DNS (e.g. ENS, Handshake), Privacy-focused networking (e.g. Tor, i2p), Decentralized identity (e.g. DID, 3Box), Data-ownership protocols (e.g. Solid), Blockchain (e.g. Ethereum), P2P databases (e.g. Gun, OrbitDB), Ad-free browsers (e.g. Brave, Beaker) | Useful for decentralized currency and payments, Useful for decentralized identity, Useful for digital certificates | IPFS, Other blockchain, ZeroNet | Values and mission, Security, Community & Support, Interoperability, Scalability, Performance | Lack of documentation, tutorial, videos and other learning resources, Hard to understand how to apply to my use cases | DWeb is not understood by general user, There is no working business model, Not enough $$ funding, Inability to connect peers behind NAT, Slow adoption of IPv6 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
82 | Censorship and access restriction by tech giants, Censorship and access restriction by governments, Ads based on personal data, User data held by applications, No anonymous access to resources and apps, Web apps are too sensitive to the connection quality | Data sovereignty (control to user), Tech resilience (from disruptive events or shut down by governments), Data authenticity (unforgeable, incorruptible data) | Decent experience in offline by default, Native user authentication, Native payment layer | Politically decentralized (not controlled by a single entity), Logically decentralized (not a single software monolith) | Taking back control of personal data, Sharing economy of storage and computing, Better compatibility of apps | Content-addressable storage (e.g. Dat, IPFS), Mesh networking (e.g. Yggdrasil, Cjdns), Local-first frameworks (e.g. Textile) | Waste of time | Ethereum | Slow adoption of IPv6 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
83 | Huge personal data leaks, No anonymous access to resources and apps, Web apps are too sensitive to the connection quality | Data sovereignty (control to user), Data privacy (more anonymity), Network anonymity (private access to resources), Tech efficiency (better performance, smoother UX) | Native user identity, Decent experience in offline by default, Native synchronization layer (e.g. pub/sub) | Architecturally decentralized (no infrastructural central point of failure) | Taking back control of personal data, Inability to shut down Web apps, Better compatibility of apps | P2P communication protocols (e.g. Matrix, SSB), Content-addressable storage (e.g. Dat, IPFS), CRDTs (e.g. Automerge), Local-first frameworks (e.g. Textile) | Values and mission, Community & Support, Interoperability | Hard to understand how to apply to my use cases | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
84 | Huge personal data leaks, Ads based on personal data, User data held by applications | Data sovereignty (control to user), Data privacy (more anonymity), Network anonymity (private access to resources), Tech efficiency (better performance, smoother UX) | Native personal data layer | Communication layer: SMTP, XMPP, IRC, Security layer: TLS / SSL | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
85 | Censorship and access restriction by governments, Ads based on personal data | Data sovereignty (control to user), Data privacy (more anonymity), Tech resilience (from disruptive events or shut down by governments), Security (cryptographic signatures everywhere), Network anonymity (private access to resources), Data authenticity (unforgeable, incorruptible data) | Native personal data layer, Native user identity, Native user authentication | Communication layer: SMTP, XMPP, IRC, Resource publishing layer: Atom / RSS | Architecturally decentralized (no infrastructural central point of failure), Logically decentralized (not a single software monolith) | Taking back control of personal data, Better compatibility of apps | P2P communication protocols (e.g. Matrix, SSB), Universal computing engine (WebAssembly), Linked data (RDF, Semantic Web) | Not a silver bullet, Useful for decentralized currency and payments | Ethereum, Other blockchain | Lack of documentation, tutorial, videos and other learning resources, Hard to scale | DWeb is not understood by general user, There is no working business model, Not enough $$ funding, Incompatibility of new protocols, We need to redesign or fix low-level protocols first | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
86 | Huge personal data leaks, Censorship and access restriction by tech giants, Censorship and access restriction by governments, Ads based on personal data, No anonymous access to resources and apps | Data sovereignty (control to user), Data privacy (more anonymity), Tech resilience (from disruptive events or shut down by governments), Security (cryptographic signatures everywhere), Network anonymity (private access to resources), Data authenticity (unforgeable, incorruptible data), Tech efficiency (better performance, smoother UX) | Native personal data layer, Native user identity, Native user authentication, Native synchronization layer (e.g. pub/sub) | Resource addressing layer: DNS, Communication layer: SMTP, XMPP, IRC, HTTP layer, Security layer: TLS / SSL, Network layer: IPv4, IPv6, Low-level transport layer: TCP, UDP | Architecturally decentralized (no infrastructural central point of failure), Politically decentralized (not controlled by a single entity), Logically decentralized (not a single software monolith), Don't trust, verify (everything is verifiable) | Taking back control of personal data, Inability to forge or censor content, No surveillance or tracking, Better compatibility of apps, Eliminating "filter bubbles" in social media | P2P communication protocols (e.g. Matrix, SSB), Decentralized DNS (e.g. ENS, Handshake), Privacy-focused networking (e.g. Tor, i2p) | Not a silver bullet | I haven't tried building with the DWeb tech | Lack of documentation, tutorial, videos and other learning resources, Hard to understand how to apply to my use cases, Hard to integrate techs with each other | DWeb is not understood by general user, Tech giants resistance, Lack of integration with Web browsers, There is no working business model, Inability to connect peers behind NAT, Incompatibility of new protocols, Slow adoption of IPv6, We need to redesign or fix low-level protocols first | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
87 | Huge personal data leaks, Censorship and access restriction by tech giants, Censorship and access restriction by governments, Ads based on personal data, User data held by applications, Web apps are too sensitive to the connection quality, | Data privacy (more anonymity), Tech resilience (from disruptive events or shut down by governments), Network anonymity (private access to resources), Data authenticity (unforgeable, incorruptible data), Tech efficiency (better performance, smoother UX) | Native personal data layer, Native user identity, Native synchronization layer (e.g. pub/sub), Native payment layer | Resource addressing layer: DNS, Communication layer: SMTP, XMPP, IRC, HTTP layer | Architecturally decentralized (no infrastructural central point of failure), Politically decentralized (not controlled by a single entity), Logically decentralized (not a single software monolith), Don't trust, verify (everything is verifiable) | Taking back control of personal data, No surveillance or tracking, Inability to shut down Web apps, Sharing economy of storage and computing, Better compatibility of apps, Eliminating "filter bubbles" in social media | P2P file sharing (e.g. Bittorrent), Privacy-focused networking (e.g. Tor, i2p), Decentralized identity (e.g. DID, 3Box), Data-ownership protocols (e.g. Solid), Mesh networking (e.g. Yggdrasil, Cjdns), Universal computing engine (WebAssembly), Blockchain (e.g. Ethereum), P2P databases (e.g. Gun, OrbitDB), Linked data (RDF, Semantic Web), Data synchronization protocols (e.g. Braid), Local-first frameworks (e.g. Textile) | Useful for decentralized identity, Useful for digital certificates | I haven't tried building with the DWeb tech | Lack of documentation, tutorial, videos and other learning resources, Hard to understand how to apply to my use cases, Hard to integrate techs with each other, It just doesn't work | DWeb is not understood by general user, There is no working business model, Not enough $$ funding | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
88 | Huge personal data leaks, Censorship and access restriction by tech giants, Censorship and access restriction by governments, User data held by applications | Data sovereignty (control to user), Data privacy (more anonymity), Tech resilience (from disruptive events or shut down by governments), Security (cryptographic signatures everywhere) | Decent experience in offline by default, Native user authentication, Native storage layer | Resource addressing layer: DNS, Communication layer: SMTP, XMPP, IRC, Resource publishing layer: Atom / RSS | Architecturally decentralized (no infrastructural central point of failure), Politically decentralized (not controlled by a single entity) | Taking back control of personal data, Inability to forge or censor content, Inability to block or revoke domain names, Better compatibility of apps, Eliminating "filter bubbles" in social media | P2P communication protocols (e.g. Matrix, SSB), Content-addressable storage (e.g. Dat, IPFS), Decentralized DNS (e.g. ENS, Handshake), Privacy-focused networking (e.g. Tor, i2p), Decentralized identity (e.g. DID, 3Box), Mesh networking (e.g. Yggdrasil, Cjdns), Universal computing engine (WebAssembly), CRDTs (e.g. Automerge) | Not a silver bullet | Values and mission, Security, Community & Support | Hard to understand how to apply to my use cases, Hard to scale | DWeb is not understood by general user, Tech giants resistance, Lack of integration with Web browsers, Not enough $$ funding, Bad UX of DWeb products | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
89 | Censorship and access restriction by tech giants, Censorship and access restriction by governments, No anonymous access to resources and apps | Data privacy (more anonymity), Tech resilience (from disruptive events or shut down by governments), Network anonymity (private access to resources) | Decent experience in offline by default, Native synchronization layer (e.g. pub/sub), Native storage layer | Resource addressing layer: DNS, HTTP layer, Network layer: IPv4, IPv6, Low-level transport layer: TCP, UDP | Architecturally decentralized (no infrastructural central point of failure), Politically decentralized (not controlled by a single entity) | Inability to forge or censor content, No surveillance or tracking, Inability to shut down Web apps, Inability to block or revoke domain names, Eliminating "filter bubbles" in social media | P2P communication protocols (e.g. Matrix, SSB), Decentralized DNS (e.g. ENS, Handshake), Privacy-focused networking (e.g. Tor, i2p), Decentralized identity (e.g. DID, 3Box), Data-ownership protocols (e.g. Solid), Blockchain (e.g. Ethereum), P2P databases (e.g. Gun, OrbitDB), Data synchronization protocols (e.g. Braid) | Useful for decentralized currency and payments, Useful for decentralized identity, Useful for lots of other tasks related to DWeb, Useful for digital certificates | I haven't tried building with the DWeb tech | Lack of documentation, tutorial, videos and other learning resources, Hard to integrate techs with each other | DWeb is not understood by general user, Immaturity of the new tech, Tech giants resistance, Lack of integration with Web browsers, Bad UX of DWeb products, We need to redesign or fix low-level protocols first | App for end-users | Under development | 3+ years | Ideological reasons | Scaling to many peers, Keeping connection stability | Not open-source | Freemium, Advertising | Self-funded | 2-5 | I don’t want to share | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
90 | Huge personal data leaks, Censorship and access restriction by tech giants, Censorship and access restriction by governments | Data privacy (more anonymity), Tech resilience (from disruptive events or shut down by governments), Security (cryptographic signatures everywhere), Data authenticity (unforgeable, incorruptible data) | Decent experience in offline by default, Native user authentication | Resource publishing layer: Atom / RSS | Architecturally decentralized (no infrastructural central point of failure), Politically decentralized (not controlled by a single entity) | Taking back control of personal data, No surveillance or tracking, Sharing economy of storage and computing, Eliminating "filter bubbles" in social media | Decentralized identity (e.g. DID, 3Box), Blockchain (e.g. Ethereum), Data synchronization protocols (e.g. Braid) | Useful for decentralized currency and payments | I haven't tried building with the DWeb tech | Hard to scale | DWeb is not understood by general user, Tech giants resistance, There is no working business model, Not enough $$ funding, Bad UX of DWeb products | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
91 | Huge personal data leaks, Censorship and access restriction by governments, No anonymous access to resources and apps | Data privacy (more anonymity), Tech resilience (from disruptive events or shut down by governments), Security (cryptographic signatures everywhere), Tech efficiency (better performance, smoother UX) | Native synchronization layer (e.g. pub/sub), Native storage layer | Communication layer: SMTP, XMPP, IRC, HTTP layer, Network layer: IPv4, IPv6, Low-level transport layer: TCP, UDP | Architecturally decentralized (no infrastructural central point of failure), Politically decentralized (not controlled by a single entity) | Inability to forge or censor content, No surveillance or tracking, Inability to shut down Web apps, Inability to block or revoke domain names | P2P communication protocols (e.g. Matrix, SSB), Content-addressable storage (e.g. Dat, IPFS), P2P file sharing (e.g. Bittorrent), Privacy-focused networking (e.g. Tor, i2p), P2P databases (e.g. Gun, OrbitDB) | Useful for decentralized currency and payments, Useful for decentralized identity, Useful for lots of other tasks related to DWeb, Useful for digital certificates | Ethereum | Values and mission | Lack of documentation, tutorial, videos and other learning resources, Hard to understand how to apply to my use cases, Hard to integrate techs with each other, Hard to scale | DWeb is not understood by general user, Lack of integration with Web browsers, Inability to connect peers behind NAT, We need to redesign or fix low-level protocols first | Tool/protocol for developers | Launched | 3+ years | Ideological reasons, Technical reasons, Legal reasons, My project is not p2p | MIT | Freemium | Self-funded | 2-5 | 100 000+ | The overall number of DWeb users is limited | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
92 | Censorship and access restriction by tech giants, Censorship and access restriction by governments, Web apps are too sensitive to the connection quality | Data sovereignty (control to user), Security (cryptographic signatures everywhere) | Native personal data layer, Native user identity, Decent experience in offline by default | Communication layer: SMTP, XMPP, IRC, Resource publishing layer: Atom / RSS | Architecturally decentralized (no infrastructural central point of failure), Politically decentralized (not controlled by a single entity) | Taking back control of personal data, Inability to forge or censor content | P2P communication protocols (e.g. Matrix, SSB), Mesh networking (e.g. Yggdrasil, Cjdns), Universal computing engine (WebAssembly) | Not a silver bullet, Useful for decentralized currency and payments, Useful for digital certificates | Secure Scuttlebutt | Values and mission, Security, Interoperability | Lack of documentation, tutorial, videos and other learning resources | DWeb is not understood by general user, Tech giants resistance, There is no working business model, Bad UX of DWeb products | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
93 | Huge personal data leaks, Censorship and access restriction by governments, Ads based on personal data, User data held by applications, | Security (cryptographic signatures everywhere) | Native user identity | Network layer: IPv4, IPv6 | Architecturally decentralized (no infrastructural central point of failure) | Taking back control of personal data, Sharing economy of storage and computing, Better compatibility of apps | P2P file sharing (e.g. Bittorrent), Privacy-focused networking (e.g. Tor, i2p), Data-ownership protocols (e.g. Solid), Universal computing engine (WebAssembly), Blockchain (e.g. Ethereum), Linked data (RDF, Semantic Web) | Not a silver bullet | ZeroNet | Community & Support, Interoperability, Scalability, Documentation | Lack of documentation, tutorial, videos and other learning resources, It just doesn't work | DWeb is not understood by general user, Lack of integration with Web browsers, We need to redesign or fix low-level protocols first | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
94 | Huge personal data leaks, Censorship and access restriction by tech giants, Censorship and access restriction by governments, Ads based on personal data, No anonymous access to resources and apps | Data sovereignty (control to user), Tech resilience (from disruptive events or shut down by governments), Security (cryptographic signatures everywhere) | Resource addressing layer: DNS, Communication layer: SMTP, XMPP, IRC | Architecturally decentralized (no infrastructural central point of failure), Politically decentralized (not controlled by a single entity) | Taking back control of personal data, Inability to forge or censor content, Sharing economy of storage and computing, Inability to block or revoke domain names | P2P communication protocols (e.g. Matrix, SSB), Content-addressable storage (e.g. Dat, IPFS), P2P file sharing (e.g. Bittorrent), Decentralized DNS (e.g. ENS, Handshake), Privacy-focused networking (e.g. Tor, i2p), Universal computing engine (WebAssembly), Blockchain (e.g. Ethereum), Ad-free browsers (e.g. Brave, Beaker) | Not a silver bullet, Useful for decentralized currency and payments, Useful for lots of other tasks related to DWeb | I haven't tried building with the DWeb tech | DWeb is not understood by general user, Tech giants resistance, There is no working business model, Inability to connect peers behind NAT, Slow adoption of IPv6 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
95 | Huge personal data leaks, Censorship and access restriction by tech giants, Censorship and access restriction by governments, Ads based on personal data, User data held by applications, No anonymous access to resources and apps | Data sovereignty (control to user), Data privacy (more anonymity), Network anonymity (private access to resources), Data authenticity (unforgeable, incorruptible data) | Native personal data layer, Native user identity, Decent experience in offline by default, Native user authentication, Native synchronization layer (e.g. pub/sub), Native storage layer, Native payment layer, Native computing layer | Communication layer: SMTP, XMPP, IRC, Resource publishing layer: Atom / RSS, Low-level transport layer: TCP, UDP | Architecturally decentralized (no infrastructural central point of failure), Politically decentralized (not controlled by a single entity) | Taking back control of personal data, Inability to forge or censor content, No surveillance or tracking, Sharing economy of storage and computing, Inability to block or revoke domain names, Better compatibility of apps | P2P communication protocols (e.g. Matrix, SSB), Content-addressable storage (e.g. Dat, IPFS), P2P file sharing (e.g. Bittorrent), Decentralized DNS (e.g. ENS, Handshake), Privacy-focused networking (e.g. Tor, i2p), Universal computing engine (WebAssembly), Blockchain (e.g. Ethereum), Ad-free browsers (e.g. Brave, Beaker), Data synchronization protocols (e.g. Braid), Local-first frameworks (e.g. Textile), Code collaboration (e.g. Radicle) | Not a silver bullet, Useful for decentralized currency and payments, Useful for decentralized identity, Useful for lots of other tasks related to DWeb, Useful for digital certificates | Dat | Values and mission, Security, Interoperability | Hard to integrate techs with each other | DWeb is not understood by general user, Immaturity of the new tech, Tech giants resistance | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
96 | Huge personal data leaks, Censorship and access restriction by governments, Ads based on personal data | Data privacy (more anonymity), Security (cryptographic signatures everywhere) | Native personal data layer, Native user authentication | Resource addressing layer: DNS | Don't trust, verify (everything is verifiable) | Taking back control of personal data | Data-ownership protocols (e.g. Solid) | Useful for lots of other tasks related to DWeb | Ethereum | Values and mission, Community & Support | Hard to understand how to apply to my use cases, Hard to integrate techs with each other | DWeb is not understood by general user | Tool/protocol for developers | Under development | 1-2 years | Technical reasons | Keeping connection stability | Apache 2.0 | Freemium | VC / Angel | 6-10 | 100 - 1000 | The overall number of DWeb users is limited | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
97 | Huge personal data leaks, Censorship and access restriction by tech giants, Censorship and access restriction by governments, Ads based on personal data, No anonymous access to resources and apps, | Data sovereignty (control to user), Data privacy (more anonymity), Tech resilience (from disruptive events or shut down by governments), Security (cryptographic signatures everywhere), Network anonymity (private access to resources), Tech efficiency (better performance, smoother UX) | None of the above | Resource addressing layer: DNS, Communication layer: SMTP, XMPP, IRC | Architecturally decentralized (no infrastructural central point of failure), Politically decentralized (not controlled by a single entity), Logically decentralized (not a single software monolith), Don't trust, verify (everything is verifiable) | Inability to forge or censor content, No surveillance or tracking, Inability to shut down Web apps, Sharing economy of storage and computing, Better compatibility of apps | P2P communication protocols (e.g. Matrix, SSB), P2P file sharing (e.g. Bittorrent), Privacy-focused networking (e.g. Tor, i2p), Mesh networking (e.g. Yggdrasil, Cjdns), Linked data (RDF, Semantic Web), Decentralized access control (e.g. Nucypher) | Not a silver bullet, Useful for decentralized currency and payments, Useful for decentralized identity | I haven't tried building with the DWeb tech | Immaturity of the new tech, Tech giants resistance, There is no working business model, Incompatibility of new protocols, Slow adoption of IPv6 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
98 | Huge personal data leaks, Censorship and access restriction by governments, Ads based on personal data, User data held by applications, No anonymous access to resources and apps | Data privacy (more anonymity), Tech resilience (from disruptive events or shut down by governments), Network anonymity (private access to resources) | Decent experience in offline by default, Native user authentication, Native storage layer | HTTP layer | Architecturally decentralized (no infrastructural central point of failure), Politically decentralized (not controlled by a single entity), Don't trust, verify (everything is verifiable) | Inability to forge or censor content, No surveillance or tracking, Inability to shut down Web apps, Inability to block or revoke domain names | Content-addressable storage (e.g. Dat, IPFS), Decentralized identity (e.g. DID, 3Box), Mesh networking (e.g. Yggdrasil, Cjdns), Universal computing engine (WebAssembly), Blockchain (e.g. Ethereum), Local-first frameworks (e.g. Textile) | Useful for decentralized currency and payments, Useful for decentralized identity, Useful for lots of other tasks related to DWeb, Useful for digital certificates | IPFS | Values and mission, Security, Interoperability | Lack of documentation, tutorial, videos and other learning resources, Hard to understand how to apply to my use cases | DWeb is not understood by general user | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
99 | Huge personal data leaks, Censorship and access restriction by governments, Web apps are too sensitive to the connection quality | Data sovereignty (control to user), Tech resilience (from disruptive events or shut down by governments), Security (cryptographic signatures everywhere), Data authenticity (unforgeable, incorruptible data) | Native user identity, Native user authentication, Native synchronization layer (e.g. pub/sub), Native payment layer | Politically decentralized (not controlled by a single entity), Don't trust, verify (everything is verifiable) | Taking back control of personal data, Inability to forge or censor content, Inability to shut down Web apps, Sharing economy of storage and computing | Not a silver bullet, Useful for lots of other tasks related to DWeb | I haven't tried building with the DWeb tech | Lack of documentation, tutorial, videos and other learning resources, Hard to understand how to apply to my use cases, Hard to get help/community support | There is no working business model, Not enough $$ funding | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
100 | Huge personal data leaks, Censorship and access restriction by tech giants, Censorship and access restriction by governments | Data sovereignty (control to user), Security (cryptographic signatures everywhere) | Native storage layer | Resource addressing layer: DNS | Architecturally decentralized (no infrastructural central point of failure), Politically decentralized (not controlled by a single entity), Logically decentralized (not a single software monolith) | Inability to forge or censor content, Sharing economy of storage and computing | P2P communication protocols (e.g. Matrix, SSB), Mesh networking (e.g. Yggdrasil, Cjdns), Linked data (RDF, Semantic Web) | Useful for decentralized currency and payments | ActivityPub | Interoperability | Hard to get help/community support | DWeb is not understood by general user, Tech giants resistance, There is no working business model, Not enough $$ funding | App for end-users | Launched | < 1 year | Ideological reasons, Economic reasons | AGPL 3.0 | No money extraction | over 10 | I can’t estimate the audience | Onboarding and educating new users is hard |