Polygon: When Will the Decentralized "Twitter" Arrive? First, Solve the "DeSoc Trilemma"

Author: Polygon

Compiled by: Cointelegraph Chinese

Compiled by: Zion Edited by: karen

People are increasingly relying on social media for news, publications, and entertainment. However, centralized players like Facebook, TikTok, and Twitter have come under fire for exploiting user data and biased moderation. Web3 solutions have entered the space, and decentralized social media platforms competing with each other are now racing to address this 21st-century issue. Some concerns have arisen regarding the feasibility of transitioning to decentralized social media due to scalability and mass adoption barriers.

Current Situation

Today, there are approximately 3.8 billion social media users, and with the proliferation of affordable mobile devices worldwide, the number of users is expanding every year.

Source: Statista

While social media is a part of daily life, its current form is almost as addictive and harmful as it is beneficial. The existing networks face criticism for biased moderation, exploitation of user data, addictive algorithms, and isolated ecosystems. Truly "fixing" social media requires a complete paradigm shift, and decentralized social media solutions are our closest approach to a genuinely democratized social space.

Rethinking Social Media from Scratch

Web2 companies focus on social media as a single product, while Web3 expands the concept of social networks to multiple layers. The foundational layer is the social graph: it maps out profiles, followers, and their connections. Next is the application layer, where users can consume content and interact with their social graph. Referencing Web2, think of the social graph as followers and the application layer as the information feed. With blockchain, there is no single entity controlling the social graph. Instead, your social graph becomes an asset rather than a product owned by a company.

Clearly, the allure of owning one's social graph is not enough to persuade billions of users to abandon their existing products. Given the growing dissatisfaction with social media policies and executives, there is a gap that needs to be filled. In addition to data ownership, complaints about decentralized followers, moderation, and closed-source algorithms present an opportunity for decentralized social media (DeSoc) to capture market share. Frankly, now is the best time to transition to DeSoc. Existing users demand a better experience, and DeSoc can act as a catalyst for cryptocurrency adoption; the latter needs popular products to catalyze its early adoption phase.

Source: World Bank, Crypto.com

Addressing the Issues

In Web2, followers and networks are isolated within each application, while Web3 social networks allow you to bring your followers to each application. Imagine how simple and time-saving it would be if you could have all your YouTube subscribers instantly follow you when you launch your brand's Instagram page. This is the benefit of separating the social graph from the application layer; your graph remains unchanged while the application layer is flexible. With future customizability, the possibility of self-authorized follower transfers can be easily realized, allowing only selected followers to be migrated.

When discussing moderation and censorship, the idea of owning one's network becomes even more significant. Donald Trump was banned from Twitter and then created his own social media app: Truth Social. With this shift, he lost his existing followers. For individuals who are not public figures, the situation can be much worse, as they risk losing their livelihoods due to social media bans. Competing DeSoc applications are experimenting with various moderation techniques to stay within legal boundaries while avoiding the excesses of Web2 moderation.

The Lens Protocol is a social graph layer built on Polygon that arguably offers the best moderation approach: it delegates moderation authority to the application layer that publishes content. If users are banned or censored at the application layer, they can simply move to another protocol that offers a similar experience. Users can retain all their followers as if nothing happened. Now, users no longer turn social media companies into arbiters of truth and hate speech but can interact with any front end willing to accept their content. This is a true free market experience.

The final piece of the social media puzzle that needs to be addressed is the algorithm issue. Today, popular social media applications are arguably more valuable than gold, as they prevent their algorithms from leaking into the public domain. However, these algorithms are designed to be as addictive as possible. Your data is how these companies profit, but your time is how they gain more data. Currently, you have no control over these algorithms. If you want to see more inspirational videos one day or a less addictive algorithm another day, you have no way to do that.

In DeSoc protocols, individuals can create open-source algorithms or multiple application layers with different algorithms, giving users greater control over the content they see. This not only represents a step forward in customizability but also has the potential to be groundbreaking for the next generation of social media users, preventing them from becoming as addicted as today's Gen Z users.

The DeSoc Trilemma

While it seems that DeSoc is the answer to all the problems of Web2 social media, there is no perfect solution. Yes, DeSoc addresses the issues mentioned above, but it introduces its own set of complexities. We coined the term "DeSoc Trilemma" to emphasize the trade-offs made in designing DeSoc protocols regarding security, scalability, and user experience (UX). Based on Vitalik's "Blockchain Trilemma," we found that none of the reviewed protocols could successfully optimize all three features.

Security vs. Scalability

Most importantly, security indicates two things in this trilemma: the decentralization of the blockchain and the execution of transactions. The decentralization of the blockchain is straightforward: with more validators, the blockchain becomes more decentralized and secure. However, this requires a trade-off between security and scalability. The more decentralized and secure the blockchain, the harder it is to scale. This explains why no DeSoc protocol can truly operate on Ethereum, as gas fees are too high and the network becomes overly congested.

Before ZK-rollups become cheap and available, DeSoc protocols need to operate on sidechains, subnetworks, or independent L1s. The most secure blockchains are not necessarily the best deployment sites for DeSoc protocols, but to be fair, unlike DeFi protocols, these protocols do not necessarily require Ethereum's security.

Security vs. User Experience

When it comes to executing transactions, some DeSoc protocols execute transactions themselves. For example, when a user follows someone, they only need to sign a message. They do not pay gas fees or actually execute the transaction; instead, the protocol itself takes on this role. This requires a trade-off between security and user experience. Abstracting gas fees is a significant advancement in user experience. Imagine how dreadful it would be if you had to pay a small portion of Instagram's AWS bill every time you wanted to post!

In fact, the ultimate user experience is connecting your wallet but never having to deal with the Metamask window prompting you to sign contracts or pay transactions. The cost of this is granting more permissions and control over the wallet to smart contracts, which are at risk of being hacked. While it promotes mass adoption, it contradicts the essence of Web3 decentralization. User experience can be considered the biggest friction point in cryptocurrency adoption; maximizing decentralization may require a different perspective.

In fact, when it comes to the trade-off between the security of executing transactions and user experience, Lens's gasless API is industry-leading. This API allows users to execute transactions on the blockchain network without paying any fees. This enables DeSoc to compete with the free-to-use Web2 social media. It reduces the need for users to wait for transactions to complete, allowing them to scroll to the next post and continue interacting freely.

The API allows users to simply sign a message (for example, as a comment), and then the relayer receives this message along with the relevant information, puts the data on-chain, and completes the transaction. For relayers, this method incurs a slight gas cost since they must verify the signature and then publish the data on-chain.

However, it makes the user experience more engaging and satisfying. Application layer platforms need to pay gas fees, meaning Lenster or LensFrens are obligated to cover these costs. While the downside of using a gasless API is that users rely on relayers to publish transactions on-chain rather than completing transactions themselves, considering that social media posts do not require the same level of security as financial transactions, this trade-off is worthwhile. Additionally, relayers also add flexibility, with a one-hour grace period to formally publish transactions on-chain, allowing them to avoid periods of high gas fees.

User Experience vs. Scalability

The trade-off between user experience and scalability is more challenging to analyze. For example, DeSo (not to be confused with DeSoc), a blockchain specifically created for social applications. DeSo has scaled to over 1.5 million users (far exceeding Lens's 50,000+ users), but it lacks the surrounding ecosystem that could benefit Polygon users, such as gaming and DeFi protocols.

Imagine being able to use your Lens profile on Polygon as collateral in a DeFi protocol to obtain a loan. This value-added composability advantage does not exist in DeSo or any DeSoc protocol built on independent blockchains. Similarly, Cyberconnect boasts extreme scalability with over 1 million accounts because it is blockchain-agnostic, allowing you to bring your social graph to any blockchain. However, due to design reasons, Cyberconnect cannot utilize NFTs within its ecosystem. Losing NFT compatibility while saving computation and simplifying the overall design process is a significant loss.

Using Lens as an example, NFTs represent your profile and your followers. They enable secondary sales of profiles, creating a whole new market. Don't want to create a meme account with a large following? You just need to purchase an NFT profile that meets those users' needs. Furthermore, NFTs provide creators with more revenue opportunities. By making posts collectible, creators can introduce exclusivity, allowing them to charge for content.

Can Decentralized Social Media Become a Reality?

Decentralized social media may provide the only realistic solution to the challenges users face on existing Web2 social media platforms.

But the question remains: is mass adoption achievable? On the surface, to prioritize user experience and scalability, maximizing decentralization may have to raise the white flag so that DeSoc can ultimately see sustainable product-market fit. The right approach seems to be separating the social layer from the application layer to further drive customizability and avoid the moderation issues present in Web2.

Ultimately, by building ecosystems outside of social media on the blockchain (such as gaming and finance) and leveraging NFTs in the design, prioritizing composability can achieve the best user experience while providing options that today's social media designs lack.