Since the launch of the Ethereum Name Service (ENS) in 2017, Web3 users have been able to replace the long strings of characters that make up an encrypted address with a blockchain username or a Web3 domain name. For example, Ethereum (ETH) users can now send cryptography to the network’s founder, Vitalik Buterin, on his username at dynamic.eth without knowing his address is 0xd8da6bf26964af9d7eed9e03e53415d37aa96045.
But despite this advancement that made it much easier to identify users, almost no one took advantage of it. There are over 200 million unique addresses on Ethereum, yet 2.2 million eth names are registered. Only as of January. This means that at least 97% of Ethereum addresses are not associated with an ENS username.
This lack of usernames creates user experience problems in the Web3 ecosystem. Just imagine if your old email addresses consisted of long strings of characters that looked like 0x7a16ff8270133f063aab6c9977183d9e72835428 or 0x3A7937851d67Ee2f51C959663749093Dc87D9C9a. If this is the case, email may not have survived as a practice.
But despite this initial lack of adoption, there is some evidence that the tide may be turning in favor of Web3 usernames. Some recent advancements in wallet and messaging apps may result in more users than ever before.
One such development is better wallet integration with free usernames.
Wallet integration and free usernames
Wallets have had the ability to understand Web3 names for a long time. According to Metamask’s changelog, it introduced the ability to send to a .eth name in October 2017, right after the launch of ENS. Other wallets have followed suit with this feature, including Coinbase Wallet, Trustwallet, and others. Some of these wallets are also integrated with ENS competitors Unstoppable Domains, Space ID, Bonfida, and others.
However, these wallets still display a crypto address to users by default, as new users usually don’t receive names automatically.
In order for a user to receive encryption via their Web3 name, they must first register a username with a specific name provider. This means knowing which provider to use, going to the providers interface, and going through the sign-up process.
To make matters worse, names can be very expensive. ENS names usually cost $5 and expire after a year, while domain names that don’t need to be renewed usually cost $20-$40. Compare this to how easy it is to sign up for an email address for free with Gmail, Outlook, and Yahoo. etc. And it’s easy to see why most crypto users don’t have a Web3 username.
Some wallet apps try to solve this problem by giving free domain names to their users. For example, the Coinbase wallet allows new users to register one .cb.id username for free, once a year, and the Kresus wallet also offers its users a free username.
This practice of giving away free usernames only recently started. Some popular wallets like Trustwallet and Metamask still don’t offer this feature. But as the number of users on the Web3 ecosystem grows, this may lead to more adoption of Web3 usernames over time.
Another recent development is the integration of instant messaging.
Messaging chat with Web3 usernames
Some messaging applications have begun to implement Web3 names as usernames, increasing the usefulness of these names beyond the payments use case. One such example is Blockscan Chat. It allows users to send instant messages to any Ethereum address or ENS username.
Caption: Blockscan chat interface. Source: Blockscan
When messages are sent using Blockscan chat, it produces alerts on the Etherscan block explorer. If the recipient sees the alert and is logged into the app, they will be able to read the message. The developer of the app claims that all of its messages are fully encrypted. So, although anyone can see if a particular user has received a message, only the sender and recipient can read it.
Web3 usernames are not an absolute necessity for using Blockscan chat, as it allows users to send messages to crypto addresses as well. But the names make it easier for users to find each other on the app.
Another example is Grill.chat, a messaging app that runs on the Subsocial Network (SUB). When a user registers for the first time, they are assigned a random username. But they can optionally attach an Ethereum wallet to their account. If they do, the app will automatically convert the random username into their own.
Arguably being able to find other users to chat with via their web3 usernames is a more useful feature than being able to send crypto with them.
After all, the crypto community is still young. If a crypto user needs funds from friends or family, they may now be better off using traditional Web2 apps like Venmo or Apple Pay, as their friends and family may not know how to use a Web3 wallet. But if someone wants to chat specifically about crypto and Web3 apps, being able to search for them by their username could be a huge advantage. This added use case may entice more users to adopt Web3 names in the future.
Another recent advancement in Web3 naming is cross naming.
via Web3 string names
When Web3 names were first invented, ENS was the only protocol that could be used to generate them, and it can only be used on Ethereum.
But the Web3 ecosystem has since grown to include many different chains. As the number of strings increases, so does the number of naming protocols. Users can now register Polygon (MATIC) usernames from Unstoppable Domains, Solana (SOL) names from Bonfida, and both Arbitrum One (ARB) and BNB Chain (BNB) usernames from ID Space.
This fragmentation across chains can make integration difficult for wallets and block explorers and cause confusion for users. For example, suppose someone’s Polygon username is newton.crypto. But when they go to register the same name on BNB Chain, they find that newton.bnb is already taken, so they register einstein.bnb instead. When the user looks at that person’s address in the block explorer, either name can appear, depending on which name the block explorer developer has chosen to display. And no matter which one is displayed, it can confuse users.
In this case for example, if a user wanted to send a crypto to newton.crypto via BNB Chain, they could easily send it to newton.bnb instead, which would turn out to be the wrong recipient.
Some Web3 companies try to fix this problem by creating a single name for each identity across multiple strings. For example, the app Redefined allows users to sign up for a username on Arbitrum One, but use it to receive funds on 8 other chains: Polygon, Optimism (OP), BNB Chain, Solana, Bitcoin (BTC), Fantom (FTM), Moonbeam (GLMR) and proximity.
To make this feature possible, Redefined allows the user to type an address or username for each network into the Arbitrum smart contract through the Manage tab within the app. Once the addresses are listed in the contract, anyone can initiate a transaction at the correct address using the “send” function within the app. To send money, the sender only needs to know the recipient’s re-identified username, not the recipient’s name or address in any given string.
Redefined usernames start with @ and have no extensions. For example, newton and einstein are redefined usernames.
Did.id, also known as “.bit”, is a similar project running on the Nervos network. It allows users to sign up for a .bit username that works across 39 different networks, including Bitcoin, Ethereum, Polygon, Solana, Bitcoin Cash (BCH), Internet Computer (ICP), and many others. Registration can be done directly using the Nervos Network wallet or indirectly using Polygon.
Did.id does not feature a UI with a “submit” function. However, it is integrated with nine different wallet apps, including imToken, Tokenpocket, MathWallet, Huobi Wallet, Bitkeep, HyperPay, AlphaWallet, ViaWallet, and MIBAO. Therefore, it is available to senders who use these wallets.
Cross-string usernames is another new development that may spur greater adoption of Web3 usernames over time.
When will usernames be known?
Despite these developments, it remains unclear how long mass adoption of Web3 usernames will take. Currently, more than 90% of Web3 addresses are not associated with any username. So there is a huge hill to climb in terms of adoption. Meanwhile, users still need to cut and paste a complex string of characters to find a person’s Web3 ID.
There are still plenty of controversies left for users, including the persistently high cost of registering a name for users of most wallet apps.
However, these developments may pave the way for the mass adoption of Web3 usernames at some point in the future.