7.8 KiB
7.8 KiB
| sidebar_position | title | hide_title |
|---|---|---|
| 4 | Solution For a Better Internet | true |
Geo Awareness is the Solution for many of the Internet Problems
The problems:
- Compare Electricity - Compares the inefficiency of relying on distant internet infrastructure to the absurdity of using electricity generated on the other side of the world.
- Internet Basics - Explains the three fundamental layers of the internet: compute/AI/storage, network, and applications, highlighting current centralization issues.
- Centralization Risk - Details the dangers of relying on centralized infrastructure and services, using real-world examples like the Ukraine conflict.
- The Race For Intelligence - Discusses how AI agents will replace traditional apps within 2 years and the implications of centralized AI development.
- GDP Negative Impact - Reveals how the current internet structure causes economic losses for developing nations, with case studies showing billions in yearly losses.
- Internet Protocol Is Broken - Explains why TCP/IP's outdated design is inadequate for modern internet needs and explores RINA as a potential solution.
- Painkillers Approach - Uses an onion analogy to illustrate how adding layers to internet infrastructure masks symptoms rather than solving core problems.
The following table shows how the problems as listed above are fixed because of geo awareness.
| Problem Area | Web2 | Web3 | Web 0 = Geo-Aware |
|---|---|---|---|
| Centralization | Dominated by a few corporations; creates fragility and dependency. | Often more Decentralized, but lacks local autonomy; often relies on centralized validators and still datacenters. | Fully decentralized and location-specific, empowering local infrastructure and sovereignty. |
| Data Sovereignty | Data stored in centralized data centers controlled by corporations. | Decentralized storage, but users often lack control over physical location. | Users choose specific locations for data storage, ensuring sovereignty and privacy. |
| Infrastructure Resilience | Vulnerable to disasters, geopolitical issues, and single points of failure. | Often less resilient compared to Web2 (^1) | Shortest physical paths and local redundancies ensure continued operation during disruptions. New paths are found when needed even by using nodes from your friends |
| Economic Impact (GDP Negative) | High costs for infrastructure; revenue flows to global platforms. | The validators are still too centralized and often hosted in centralized datanceters. Too complicated and too early days to help right now. | Localized infrastructure boosts regional economies, keeping revenue within countries. |
| Internet Efficiency | Long data routes; underutilized hardware; inefficient layers. | Reliant on outdated protocols, vulnerable because of used ledger tech (^1) and layered inefficiencies. | Shortest paths reduce latency and cost; full hardware optimization ensures efficiency. |
| Security and Transparency | Complex, security by smart employees of the corporations. | Smart contracts improve security, but issues remain as code upgrade path. | Transparent and tamper-proof deployments ensure security and resilience. |
| Layer Complexity | Redundant layers create inefficiencies and fragility. | Often web3 is more complex compared to web 2. | Simplifies architecture by localizing compute, storage, and networking. 10x less development effort is possible |
| Application Hosting | Hosted in large centralized data centers, increasing latency and cost. | Sometimes, decentralized hosting but not geographically optimized. | Applications can be hosted locally, reducing latency and ensuring autonomy. |
| Access Inequality | Over 50% of the world lacks reliable access. | Expands access but without addressing local infrastructure challenges. | Geo-aware systems build localized, affordable infrastructure to improve access. |
| Session Management | Breaks under interruptions; no native continuity. | Some continuity improvements via decentralized protocols. | Built-in session management ensures reliability even during disruptions. |
Challenges in the Current Depin (Decentralized Internet) World
Despite advancements in decentralized technology, geo-awareness remains under-prioritized.
Current Web3 solutions focus on decentralization without accounting for the geographic efficiency or sovereignty that geo-awareness offers.
Comparison Table: Current Web3 Solutions vs. Geo-Aware Systems
| Feature | Current Web3 Solutions | Geo-Awareness |
|---|---|---|
| Storage | Global, often randomly distributed without user control | Users choose storage locations; data remains sovereign |
| Compute | Decentralized but lacks location-specific optimization | Compute occurs at chosen locations; optimized for region |
| Network | Relies on global, non-optimized routing | Shortest physical path for communication |
| Ledger | Public blockchains are unreliable in case of network issues | Location-aware sovereign ledgers for national and local control |
| Resilience | Vulnerable to global internet disruptions | Independent operation during outages |
| Application Control | Limited transparency on app deployment locations and upgrade paths. | Full control and visibility of app deployment |
| Data Integrity | Prone to distributed risks and complexities | Tamper-proof, user-controlled data access |
Why Geo-Awareness Matters
The current centralized and globalized digital architecture exacerbates inefficiencies, compromises sovereignty, and creates economic dependencies. Geo-awareness addresses these problems by creating a decentralized yet location-sensitive framework. This ensures that infrastructure is resilient, secure, and operates in harmony with the physical realities of the world, ultimately empowering users and nations alike.