If the metaverse is to follow the web 2.0 model, how should it be governed

The emergence of the term Internet metaverse lies in demonstrating the digitization of economic society, with cryptocurrency, blockchain, and decentralization, all of which are penetrations of technology. Compared to the identity Internet of the web 2.0 era, the emergence of metaverse further creates the economic value of personal identity in the network, while continuing the decentralized nature of web 2.0, the access process of free development and development policy, based on metaverse is no longer a unilateral transmission process, but the role of one node after another linked on the Internet, decentralized The centralized data makes everyone reachable and gradually disengage, spreading to regional flows beyond national borders, involving complex political issues (barassi 2012) calls it a combined logic, In this paper, it will be mentioned that the United States has a dominant attitude towards the development of information, with a large number of leading companies, and while being optimistic about this free soil, it is also important to focus on how we should govern The problem of the metaverse, the analysis of the users, helps to highlight the tensions that arise from the combination of technology and society.

What is the metaverse? From user to ownership

The metaverse brings decentralization as web 3.0 brings distributed transmission through blockchain and cryptographic hashing. The so-called decentralized means that each node of the decentralized technology cannot have absolute control over data(Sparkes 2021) it is not dependent on reality in the world. Open  source means that individual information is well stored and Individuals spontaneously upload the value generated by the data to the web to generate value on the platform,  they don’t care about what they upload because it’s only a tiny part of the data and big data automatically classifies it as the same part of the data, just like the meta space created by Facebook or others to browse, a powerful path from web 2.0 to web 3.0,But are we really becoming the master of internet?

Wikipedia encourages individuals to create their selves and make their voices heard, so there is an example of a Chinese netizen who spent six years on a Wikipedia event forging a fake Russian history  Who made it own interest into a digital world . which the logical thinking sounded correct while fabricating nearly 60 articles and documents. The encyclopedia is heavily cited, interacted and shared in Wikipedia, and while it allows users to edit large databases freely, it is not a manifestation of decentralization but rather a free creation despite the lack of responsibility for the content and activities he carries in an international context and the reluctance to limit speech.

Government interact in Metaverse

These platforms face more management of broad platform governance, and the diversity of purpose scope members’ design can simultaneously avoid government accountability for the podium. First of all, as far as policies are concerned, policies should not restrict private investment, as well as content, systems, and innovations, where they can provide social benefits. In a metaverse where the benefits to the social environment and the benefits generated by individuals are relatively blurred, governments do not necessarily look out for the public interest at all times Governments do not necessarily look out for the public interest (Tarleton 2018)and large media companies  PwC predicts that the metaverse will reach $1. 5 trillion in revenue  if the metaverse grows as predicted, the opportunities for economy could be vast .

 In terms of government policy regulation, metadata with its decentralized model also interferes with the sovereignty system of some countries, the economic system built on blockchain technology, and traditional Internet rule makers tend to be highly centralized sovereignty in the government

One of the three forms of authority proposed by Weber is jurisprudential authority, modern law and the state, and bureaucrats, for example countries like China, Russia, North Korea, because its Blockchain is not completely decentralized. Rather, it relies on one large company after another to form the master chain, which is eventually centralized to the government,

which has the advantage of effectively protecting the view of citizens, and the government deciding what is visible and what is not, However, every major company in China needs a government affairs department to lubricate its relationship with the state(de Kloet et al., 2019) in the case of China, which has generated its own practices in terms of metaverse, making the combination of personal identity (Gregor 2015) part and generate economic value, and it can be said that China is considered one of the first players to enter this game, online In the web 2. 0 era, based mainly on the conditions of communication and interaction, information has become a commodity, but the ownership of information is not very clear

In contrast, the U.S. environment is more in line with the metaverse, recognizing property and economic Freedom, but it is important to note that, based on multilateral corporate dominance, the United States, economic stratification produces class, power stratification produces political parties, and social stratification produces interest groups, and business interests are maximized in each company’s interest, including the protection of personal digital copyright .The interest is to put pressure on the technology companies that make the tools and provide services that people use every day (Suzor,2019  )These constitute the impact of effective legislation to protect personal privacy

5 Governments in Metaverse | In 5 Minutes by Metaverse Simplified  ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. Retrieved from  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NXwdLueq1CQ

but at the same time the power factor of either can be translated into a , social class freedom of expression, and the resulting infringement on the right to freedom is becoming increasingly common, web 3.0 should maximize the development of its ownership, but in terms of digital ownership as public concern increases, solutions include limited liability, safe harbor, and downgrading below search engines, regulation of Internet providers (Tarleton 2018) should take more responsibility in law, while ensuring infrastructure access Because web 3.0 also requires the use of blockchain to consolidate people’s business models, based on interaction and communication, creating a model that maximizes the tracking of digital identities beyond the generally established ways of using digital technology, allowing more practice of such issues

Reference list :

Suzor, N. (2019). Lawless: The Secret Rules That Govern our Digital Lives. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. doi:10.1017/9781108666428

de Kloet, J., Poell, T., Guohua, Z., & Yiu Fai, C. (2019). The platformization of Chinese society: Infrastructure, governance, and Practice. Chinese Journal of Communication, 12(3), 249–256. https://doi.org/10.1080/17544750.2019.1644008