While plenty of projects exist today claiming privacy is important; few have actually proven that protecting users’ data alone will retain the user base of that given service(s).
#Night $NIGHT @MidnightNetwork
With Midnight’s Phase 1, I believe it’s time to bring that discussion back into a more practical focus than purely just talked about.
Privacy has long been regarded as the key piece missing from blockchains, i.e., public ledgers contain too much information (transaction details, identities, behavioural patterns) about each user participating in the network. The general idea has always been that individuals will default toward a system that does a better job at protecting their identity; however, for far too many users, ease-of-use and access to the larger eco-system still outweighs the value placed on having protection over their personal data.
Midnight’s Phase 1 will be intriguing because it won’t just be an idealistic promise of how important privacy is going forward, but will actually enable those building applications using private data to experience privacy in an operational format. Meaning, in essence, we are no longer simply talking about “the impact of privacy” from a theoretical standpoint (e.g., “theoretically, privacy will give individuals greater peace/comfort and assurance than current methods, etc.”), but rather talking about and experiencing privacy in the form of practical (real-world) experience(s).
The difference between the two (theoretical vs practical) is greater than most people will think)
For many, defining 'privacy' can be easier said than done; while it might seem straightforward when looking from a conceptual standpoint, the implementation of privacy often introduces new barriers. In practical terms, implementing Privacy Practices creates friction in user experience, limits the ability for composability and ultimately presents challenges to promote trust and transparency. Midnight plans to introduce friction and challenge the Ecosystem's current thinking about privacy by forcing all stakeholders within the Ecosystem to recognize these challenges.
The more significant question, however, is not whether or not privacy is meaningful to users; there is little doubt that it is. Instead, there are questions around whether the protection of user data will be sufficient in helping to maintain engagement with the platform post-novellty; will users continue to use the platform merely because of the protections in place for their data or will there need to be other justifications for users to remain active after they have lost the novelty of using Midnight?
At this time, the answer to these questions cannot be provided based upon the current version of Midnight (Phase 1) but rather through future experience and development of Midnight, it should allow for answers to these questions to materialize.
What's remarkable about making this shift is that Midnight takes the concept of "privacy" from being an abstract thought and creates, now, an opportunity for conducting objective experiments to subsequently measure user engagement (usage), retention, and developer activity - these metrics over time will provide the confirmation of or against the premise that privacy can exist as a core capability versus that of being an opportunity; the other potential outcome is that should the metrics yield different results, those results will certainly necessitate additional rethinking of how privacy-based capabilities are delivered through the Ecosystem.
Ultimately, Midnight is advancing the conversation about what is necessary.