Introduction

The rise of the world wide web has been instrumental to the values that we hold in today’s society. It has brought about a time of convenience and new social rules that have never before been seen, however, it has raised ethical issues surrounding privacy, and most importantly freedom. Are we truly free if all our information is funneled into a handful of monopolies that own the internet? What about companies that sell our data to 3rd party advertisers? When it comes to the internet, the discussion of who owns the internet has come into question since the introduction of web 2.0 (Ali, 2017, 245).

Over the past iterations of the internet, web 2.0 saw the emergence of data collection, since static sites became a gamble of advertising and competition to monetize and profit off of the abundance of user data that was funneling into websites (Anderson-Gold, 2011). This ultimately led to a lot of privacy concerns and who really owns the internet as a whole. Is it Google? The company that owns 92% of the total search engine market share worldwide and the advertising APIs that most companies use on a regular basis (Anderson-Gold, 2011). Due to the nature of competition, many individuals have fought back against these monopolies, believing that they have too much control over the internet as a whole (Anderson-Gold, 2011).

The issue with our "Free" centralized internet

Having a free world wide web with near limitless content to consume takes a ton of money and infrastructure to build and deploy, thus in order to sustain these business practices they need to find better ways to monetize the user base (Roy, 2021, 1551). However, this monetization practice has raised ethical questions about data privacy and other security concerns. Our personal data is the price we pay for these free internet services. Not to mention the anti-competitive behavior that has occurred that were capitalized on by the tech giants that we see today (Rudman & Bruwer, 2016, 52). We have now become complacent on mediocrity and the outright unethical practices of these large organizations, and we can’t do anything about it due to the monopolistic and anti-competitive behavior (Roy, 2021, 1542).

From unethical tracking, to hoarding millions of gigabytes of user data without the true knowledge of the user base, web 2.0 has evolved into a complete ethical nightmare, as companies try to squeeze their consumers for as much revenue, whether it is through advertising or subscription services (Roy, 2021, 1553). This also asks the question about how compromised data gets handled when there is a breach of security. Do you trust these companies to ensure that they are dealing with 3rd party advertisers, and if so, do you trust them to handle your data safely and securely?

Google itself is something that is controlling nearly every aspect of your internet lives (Anderson-Gold, 2011). They control an uncontrollable amount of data and power, whether it is in the form of apps like Google Maps or Android, but the biggest concern is that they are the number one search engine in the world (Roy, 2021, 1546). Everything you look up is linked to your google account or your device, and Google can push any targeted advertisements to your phone based on key features.

Why Web3 is a plausible solution

There has been another solution proposed, and that is the introduction to a new decentralized internet, also known as Web 3.0. A decentralized internet allows servers to run decentralized, if one server or service fails, then it won’t take out the entire infrastructure like say if Google experienced an outage or a slowdown (Chen, n.d., 32). This decentralization of the internet would make it harder to bring down, thanks to individual nodes in the blockchain being harder to compromise (Chen, n.d., 32). In a Cryptography sense, security is crucial to having a functioning network, but even if a node fails, that node would work as an independent system from the overall website.

This would also provide a trustless environment for the world wide web to flourish (Kitazawa, 2022). Instead of having a small handful of companies like Meta, Google, Amazon, and Apple dominating the global internet market, a decentralized internet would be owned by everyone. No matter who the user is, they would all own a small bit of their internet, and allow anyone with a voice to have their own freedom of expression and speech (Majumder, 2022). Decentralization allows the internet to be truly free and non-reliant on a central authority, ensuring that we don’t need to place our trust in anyone other than yourself (Chen, n.d., 32).

Ultimately, the ethical side of a decentralized internet would put security and privacy in the hands of the consumer. It would protect the ethical and privacy side, instead of monopolizing and capitalizing on the exploitation of data from users. However, this anonymity could also be used for nefarious and unethical purposes.

Drawbacks

With any new technology, there are also some drawbacks when it comes to web 3.0, which I will discuss in this section. Since web 3.0 is as new as it is, there is a lot of speculation on how long this will take before it takes off, and what are the social implications of web 3.0. This is ultimately decided on whoever creates the first website that provides utility that web 2.0 doesn’t already provide that satisfies and engages everyone who uses web 2.0.

Otherwise, they have no incentive to switch to web 3.0, since if everything they have is on web 2.0, then not many people would decide to choose web 3.0. This has been a concern for awhile, since even though web 3.0 sounds interesting for engineers and software enthusiasts, most people don’t actually know much about the world wide web, and most of them trust large tech companies to safeguard their privacy, which is an obvious illusion of security.

This needs to be able to offer enough utility for everyone to enjoy the benefits of web 3.0, while ensuring the security of web 3.0. This will be a harder challenge than it sounds, since most people are typically against change, and they don’t want to configure their security token when it comes to blockchain technology and cryptography.

Blockchain is also not entirely foolproof, especially as an early adopter, there have been a lot of issues with hacked and leaked information regarding cryptocurrencies being stolen from individual’s wallets. Network miners can hold nearly the same amount of power as large corporations, as 51% of the network miners are bribed to alter the ledger, which can result in corruption and incorrectness in the ledger. Additionally, if one of the nodes of the blockchain network, it is disabled and cannot communicate, thus this can compromise the entire chain.

This could also harvest a massive amount of fraud being committed, since there is no easy way to tax a decentralized ledger, or decentralized currency like cryptocurrency. There is also an issue surrounding how communication standards are being set in place, making the decentralized internet less user friendly (Brukhman, 2016, 4).

An ethical analysis

In an ethical sense, Kantian ethics tells us that we should protect our rights to privacy, no matter the cost, and privacy is also incorporated into our universal and moral principles that apply to everyone (Moss & Metcalf, 2019). No one should have their basic human rights violated, and many have stated that their personal data and privacy are part of those rights (Brukhman, 2016, 4). We shouldn’t have to exploit our personal lives as monetary currency, just to be able to access the world wide web. In the next iteration of web 3.0, we explore a new path of a decentralized internet, which allows people to retain their privacy, instead of relying on a centralized form of the world wide web, like how web 2.0 is being run (Brukhman, 2016, 4).

However, this has some implications with privacy over national security. Should the greater good of human-kind be jeopardized thanks to the abuses that privacy holds? In a utilitarian view of ethics, we can determine that privacy and web 3.0 are inherently good, as long as moral principles are not breached (Rajiv & Manohar, 2010, 24). These moral principles ensure that despite your data not being transparent and breachable, it should also contain a fine line when the form of national security and individual lives are at risk.

Web 3.0 would provide a great asset for the right to privacy, but we must not disregard other human values, such as any threat to oneself.

References

Ali, M. (2017). Blockstack: A New Decentralized Internet. Blockstack, 4(1), 22.

Anderson-Gold, S. (2011, June 03). Home. YouTube. Retrieved November 20, 2022, from https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/kantian-review/article/abs/privacy-respect-and-the-virt%20ues-of-reticence-in-kant/64948E9047BF72B87B6B21D57A44A3F0

Andrejevic, M. (2005). work of watching one another: Lateral surveillance, risk and governance. Surveillance & Society, 4(2), 497.

Arunkumar, V. R. (2021). Scholarly Communication on Web 3.0: An Analysis Based on Web of Science. 01(01).

Benady, D. (2016, November 7). Can advertising support a free internet? | Media & Tech Network. The Guardian. Retrieved November 20, 2022, from https://www.theguardian.com/media-network/2016/nov/07/can-advertising-support-free-internet

Bogost, I. (2020, July 26). So Much for Decentralized Internet | Resources | Ethics at Work | University of Notre Dame. Ethics at Work. Retrieved November 20, 2022, from https://ethicsatwork.nd.edu/resources/so-much-for-decentralized-internet/

Brody, P. (2022, January 3). Web 3.0 Is Too Complicated. CoinDesk. Retrieved November 20, 2022, from https://www.coindesk.com/layer2/2022/01/03/web-30-is-too-complicated/

Brukhman, J. (2016, May 11). On ethics in decentralized systems | by Jake Brukhman. Web 3.0- Privacy, Ethics and Other Moral Aspects. Retrieved November 20, 2022, from https://blog.coinfund.io/on-ethics-in-decentralized-systems-213ad705b462

Chang, V. (2018, July 5). Global Web Hosting Services Market Share Report, 2020-2027. Grand View Research. Retrieved November 20, 2022, from https://www.grandviewresearch.com/industry-analysis/web-hosting-services-market

Chen, J. (n.d.). decentralized internet of things software framework for a peer-to-peer and interoperable IoT device. ACM SIGBED, 15(2), 36.

Counter, S. (2022, October 15). Search Engine Market Share Worldwide. Statcounter Global Stats. Retrieved November 20, 2022, from https://gs.statcounter.com/search-engine-market-share

Diaz, J. (2009, July 10). Security issues of Web 2.0. BCS. Retrieved November 20, 2022, from https://www.bcs.org/articles-opinion-and-research/security-issues-of-web-20/

Hamilton, H. (2017, December 6). Home. electronicproducts. Retrieved November 20, 2022, from https://www.electronicproducts.com/the-pros-and-cons-of-a-decentralized-internet

Kitazawa, T. (2022, March 13). Security, Privacy, and Ethics in the Web 3.0 Era. Takuya Kitazawa. Retrieved November 20, 2022, from https://takuti.me/note/web3/

Majumder, P. (2022, July 27). Web 3.0- Privacy, Ethics and Other Moral Aspects. Analytics Vidhya. Retrieved November 20, 2022, from https://www.analyticsvidhya.com/blog/2022/07/web-3-0-privacy-ethics-and-other-moral-aspects/

Moss, E., & Metcalf, J. (2019, November 14). The Ethical Dilemma at the Heart of Big Tech Companies. Harvard Business Review. Retrieved November 20, 2022, from https://hbr.org/2019/11/the-ethical-dilemma-at-the-heart-of-big-tech-companies

Rajima, D. (2021, September 22). PROS OF DECENTRALIZED INTERNET. The prime difference between… | by Darshita | Wicrypt. Medium. Retrieved November 20, 2022, from https://medium.com/wicrypt/pros-of-decentralized-internet-25deed8bb871

Rajiv, L., & Manohar, L. (2010). Web 3.0 in Education & Research. BVICAM's International Journal of Information Technology (BIJIT) ISSN 0973-5658, 3(6), 52.

Rosenzweig, P. (2014, November 12). Privacy as a Utilitarian Value - Lawfare. Lawfare Blog. Retrieved November 20, 2022, from https://www.lawfareblog.com/privacy-utilitarian-value

Rowe, A. (2018, February 23). Everything You Need to Know About the Decentralized Internet. Tech.co. Retrieved November 20, 2022, from https://tech.co/news/decentralized-internet-guide-2018-02

Roy, D. G. (2021). A Blockchain-based Cyber Attack Detection Scheme for Decentralized Internet of Things using Software-Defined Network. Software: Practice and Experience, 51(7), 1556.

Rudman, R., & Bruwer, R. (2016). Defining Web 3.0: opportunities and challenges. The Electronic Library, 34(1), 154.

Team, C. (2022, October 26). Home. YouTube. Retrieved November 20, 2022, from https://corporatefinanceinstitute.com/resources/esg/kantian-ethics

Wainewright, P. (2008, January 22). How to really make money with Web 2.0. ZDNet. Retrieved November 20, 2022, from https://www.zdnet.com/article/how-to-really-make-money-with-web-2-0/

Zargham, M. (2021, March 27). Engineering Ethics in Web3. Ethics as Mission and Motivation for… | by Michael Zargham | Token Engineering Commons. Medium. Retrieved November 20, 2022, from https://medium.com/token-engineering-commons/engineering-ethics-in-web3-18d981278018