Web3 represents the next evolution of the internet, characterized by decentralization, and ownership. Unlike its predecessors, Web3 aims to empower users by eliminating intermediaries and giving individuals control over their data and assets. Most of the current discussion in the space – beyond the noise of scams and hacks – revolves around the competition between tech stacks and approaches: EVM vs BPF vs CosmWASM, L1 vs L2, monolithic vs parallel, etc. The competition between chains is about their transaction costs, speed, decentralization grade. These discussions mobilize the most energy and resources in the space. No question, they are highly relevant in the short term.

In the long term however, if we look at the endgame, I am convinced that the critical element that will determine the success and sustainability of Web3 is governance. Technological stacks will eventually converge and become as invisible as IMAP/POP3/TCP-IP. Blockspace will be a commodity, data availability too. Technical decentralization will improve with better hardware and software. But governance will remain the defining factor to determine which Web3 ecosystem will drive the more users, utility and capital. It will also determine if Blockchains can live up to the promise of decentralization.

The internet has evolved from the static, information-based Web1 to the interactive, social Web2, and now to the decentralized Web3. Web1 was characterized by static websites providing information. The governance of this Web was highly decentralized and mostly focused on agreements around technical standards.

Web2 introduced interactivity and user-generated content, fostering social networks and platforms. But this came with a high cost in terms of governance: power concentrated in a few hands and organizations.

One of the promises of Web3 is to reverse this tendency by decentralizing power and control, allowing users to interact directly through blockchain technology without intermediaries. In this frame, decision-making shifts from central authorities to a distributed network of stakeholders. This is at least the theory.

In practice Web3 governance is pretty broken: low voter turnout, factions, and many reinventions. For example many ecosystems the reinvention of institutions like elected committees that have proven to be bad at taking effective and consensual decisions.

Over time, technological stacks will converge and become invisible to users. We can already see the beginning of this process: interoperability between ecosystems is growing: As an example, EVM chains are slowly moving toward the logic of the Interchain and IBC, which in turn is slowly integrating the idea of restaking through shared security.

Down the line, the distinguishing factor for Web3 ecosystems will be their governance structures. A good analogy are countries and the concept of “risk country”, which rates the risk you take as an investor to invest in a certain country. To put it blantly: Will you prefer to put your money in Venezuela or in Switzerland?

The same will happen with Web3 and users and capital will move to the "lowest risk country. The one with the most resilient, effective and legitimate governance. In my view and as outlined in other places, one key piece of the winning architecture will be deliberative governance and sortition-based governance.

• Decision Lego: A Primitive on Governance for the 21st Century

• Cosmos Citizens' Assembly Pilot Report: Cosmos Forum Report

• Optimism Collective Deliberative Processes Experiment: Optimism Governance Forum