CLoM » Web 3.0 - The end of the world, but in a nice way

From RationalWiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Web 3.0 - The end of the world, but in a nice way

[ main page ]

This is a thing I'm starting. I am starting this.

WEB 3.0

Previously the internet has been largely dictated by the forces of "no force at all". We find this deeply suspicious, and wish to replace this not-a-force with an actual force. At the moment the internet has no actual representatives, no native citizens, no economy and no borders, despite being fundamentally separate from any other community. The internet is regularly belittled by citizens of the world, despite the fact that they are subservient to it. The exports of the internet are received with entitlement and sometimes hostility.

This must all change. We intend to make the internet a distinct nation in its own right, under the sovereignty of no other nation. The internet will have a populace, a government and a standing army. The internet will extent its services with negotiation, rather than operating under an arrangement of virtual slavery. The governors of the internet will receive diplomatic immunity. Where web communities might once have been dominated by squabbling and poor communication, we envision the creation of a clear hierarchy with a unified mission. This update will be devoted to explaining what this mission is and why we need it.

What has been wrong for so long will be righted. The name of the system that achieves this is Web 3.0. When Web 3.0 is finished, the result will be a Nation of Letters.


Here is the list of current citizens of the Web:

  1. Mei

You can add yourself in the comment section if you wish. I would have used this space to develop a new vision of civil structure, but with only one citizen it could be seen as redundant. We can develop our civil structure as new people enter the nation. Unlike any other state we will have the luxury of preparing our legal structure in a circumstance where the number of citizens is extremely low. Where others were forced to adapt previous models and appease their serfs, we can dissect the moral principles of government and reconstruct them in the style of inventors, not landlords.


In order to join Web 3.0 you may have to make serious changes to your lifestyle. To communicate with people on Web 3.0 you must wear a tie, a formal jacket and at least one shoe. The region of your socks is a private matter.

Communities that already exist in Web 2.0 will require serious structural modification to meet these standards. YouTube will be allowed to exist on the understanding that it apply restrictive membership. 4chan will be replaced by one teenager in a room.


Several old words will be rendered obsolete in the upgrade to 3.0. A short list with replacements follows.

  1. destruction -> To be replaced by destroyal, for it's richer sound. This one is very important. Write it down.
  2. presumably -> To be replaced by assumably.
  3. legality -> merged into legalism
  4. normality -> becomes normalism
  5. high concept -> becomes hignept
  6. most winning -> becomes winningest. An example would be "this prize reserved for the very winningest of winners".


What I've described will eventually become a reality. It is probably too much to expect for unity across the internet, but in time we will see the establishment of sovereign states that exist only in cyberspace. The technology already exists to make this an inevitable result. The internet has given us limitless powers to communicate, and the potential of complete anonymity. It is increasingly possible for websites to defy the law of the outside world, which we have seen recently in the case of WikiLeaks. To make another example - to defy the Chinese government, you need only make one successful post on the internet. For the government to prevent this, they must make thousands of actions a day. Our procedures of prosecution for web-based crimes are already absurdly dated, and can not logically be updated to allow separate physical countries to control what happens on the internet. The internet will become impossible to regulate by our legality, and from there I argue that it will regulate itself, to an extent, based on its distinct community.

What defines a state is the ability to not be immediately consumed by another state. That is all. And now we have that, running under Windows.

For predicting the future and possible doom of civilization, I hope to be offered some sort of lucrative lecturing post. Please remember that part.

--Mei (talk) 07:50, 18 April 2010 (UTC)

[ main page ]



As I have never worn socks, singly or in pairs, nor can I make any assumptiation that I could do so in the near future, I think there could be a problem with the legalosity of my joining Web 3.0. I'm not looking forward to the destructanation of my current way of life and prefer its normalacity. However, I wish you luck and may Web 3.0 become the most winningmationist endeavour ever. --PsyGremlinПоговорите! 10:06, 18 April 2010 (UTC)

ಠ______ಠ Most of those words are not approved. Mei (talk) 21:10, 18 April 2010 (UTC)

I will gladly join this[edit]

I can wear ties and formal suits, and often wear not one but two shoes. I would like to apply for the job of senior under-over-sideways-forwards-positive-imaginary-secretary for the management of governance of leadership. Harmonic wisest Hoover! 10:21, 18 April 2010 (UTC)

I would also like to apply as Minister of Hierarchotopology. Harmonic wisest Hoover! 13:16, 18 April 2010 (UTC)
I too will join Meistan or whatever it will be called. My one fear, though, is that the citizens of the real world constitute a security risk because of their ability to pull the plug out of the wall. Tetronian you're clueless 13:58, 18 April 2010 (UTC)
How will they know where the plug is? Mei (talk) 21:10, 18 April 2010 (UTC)
Hooray for all my citizens. We do not have a name yet. Plus I am beginning to regret all those language jokes. Maybe I should have made one serious update and one not-serious one. Mei (talk) 21:10, 18 April 2010 (UTC)
Suggest official motto be "MEIA VSVI EST". Harmonic wisest Hoover! 16:03, 19 April 2010 (UTC)
What do you think our monetary system should be? Mei (talk) 18:00, 19 April 2010 (UTC)
What could we possibly trade? Software? If we're creating an internet state anything proprietary will be undercut by the nerds that would inevitably accumulate. Harmonic wisest Hoover! 18:03, 19 April 2010 (UTC)
The Mei. 100 Mei = 1 Mei. Totnesmartin (talk) 18:08, 19 April 2010 (UTC)
BORING. Powers of ten are so 19th Century. Two is the way forward! Harmonic wisest Hoover! 18:09, 19 April 2010 (UTC)
You mean like binary? I think that would look a bit patronizing. I think an internet state would probably end up trading pornography. It is inevitable. Mei (talk) 18:40, 19 April 2010 (UTC)
No, make the denomination 255 squibs to a squob (or whatever), then number it in hex. The numbers are easy enough to work with and it interfaces better with computers, appropriate for an internet state. Harmonic wisest Hoover! 18:51, 19 April 2010 (UTC)
You can be in charge of all money and banks. Mei (talk) 19:01, 19 April 2010 (UTC)
I first propose that the currency symbol be "#", because it looks cool, is in the ASCII, and is already associated with numbers. I am also open to the suggestion that there be no secondary denomination. Harmonic wisest Hoover! 19:06, 19 April 2010 (UTC)
I agree with your symbol. What is your thinking about the secondary denomination? Would you just use decimals? How do decimals even work in hex? Mei (talk) 19:11, 19 April 2010 (UTC)
Decimals are normally represented in wp:Floating-point, which leads on to another advantage of using hex: base-10 decimals are frequently recurring in floating-point, so you can't exactly represent 0.1. Harmonic wisest Hoover! 19:16, 19 April 2010 (UTC)
Math is confusing for Mei. :( Mei (talk) 19:40, 19 April 2010 (UTC)
It's the same as the way you can't exactly write 1/3 as a decimal. Harmonic wisest Hoover! 19:42, 19 April 2010 (UTC)
I understood the part about recurring. I did not understand that article about floating point. Mei (talk) 19:52, 19 April 2010 (UTC)
Floating point is basically scientific notation in binary. Harmonic wisest Hoover! 19:54, 19 April 2010 (UTC)
OK then. Mei (talk) 19:57, 19 April 2010 (UTC)

← What will this state do? Harmonic wisest Hoover! 20:38, 19 April 2010 (UTC)

It will assert custodianship of its citizens. Mei (talk) 04:57, 20 April 2010 (UTC)

This is my kind of state...[edit]

I presume that the "legalism" that your state will adopt will involve the killing of scholars and the burning of books, with any dissenters sent to build the Great Wall of Mei? --The Emperor Kneel before Zod! 03:17, 20 April 2010 (UTC)

Actually, I coined legalism as a term of derision. The law in a state run by Mei would minimal. Sorry! :3 Mei (talk) 04:57, 20 April 2010 (UTC)
We should totally have a Great Wall of Mei though. Mei (talk) 04:57, 20 April 2010 (UTC)