web3lookup

Adoption is not a marketing problem.

man on a mountain

Three claims. One question.

orange landscape mad max theme
( 01 )

Complexity is a filter

man on a mountain
( 02 )

Agents need witnesses

orange landscape mad max theme
( 03 )

The fix comes from below

Three claims that sound separate. They are the same one.

Who gets
to check?
Three scales.

U

portrait of a man with rapidity theme

( scale one )

The user, not asked

M

portrait of a person with Basic Attention Token theme and crypto logos

( scale two )

The machine, not watched

R

A person facing a data logging screen, security theme.

( scale three )

The rule, not yours

web3
lookup

Accessibility is not charity.
It is thirty years of shipping
what the industry called unusable.

Two Nespresso coffee capsules.
A patch embroidered with the words ‘get your green'
Portrait of a male model
A raised hand with the index finger pointing upward
A shirtless man balancing on the top of a structure.
A fully chromed, designer hammer placed on a carpet.
A portrait of a woman with a music headset, dressed entirely in orange.
A professional cyclist, viewed from the front.
An orange racing driver’s glove.
A person resting their hand on a couch
A portrait of a female model with vegetation in the background
A portrait of two female models partially hiding their faces with their hands in white and black

Web3 treats its usability problem as a communication problem.
Explain harder. Onboard better. Write another guide.

NEVER WORKED.

A shirtless man balancing on the top of a structure in 16-9

Accessibility never had that luxury. When someone cannot use your interface, no amount of explaining fixes it. You change the thing.

A portrait of two female models partially hiding their faces with their hands with orange photo filter

Every barrier
protects someone.

Hover Tap to count them

Each one was a reasonable decision.
Together, they became a door policy.

Complexity is rarely
a bug. It is a position, and positions
get defended.

Connect

Three questions

UX asks how to make something pleasant. Accessibility asks whether the person can do it at all.

The difference shows up in what counts as finished. A UX review ends when the flow feels smooth for the people in the room. An accessibility review ends when someone who was not in the room can complete the task. One is a matter of taste. The other is a matter of fact, and you can be wrong about it in a way that shows.

Web3 has the second problem.

There is no final answer, and anyone selling you one is selling something.

Every chain of trust ends somewhere. The useful question is not how to end it, but how short to make it and who is allowed to look. A tool that reads the chain directly has one fewer party to trust than a tool that reads someone’s index of it. That is arithmetic.

Shorten the chain. Publish what you read. Let someone check.

See it working →

I work on accessibility in Web3 and AI.

Right now that means web3lookup, a project that resolves Web3 domain names in your browser. No account, no sign-up, no third-party indexer standing between you and the chain. It is a small thing. It is also the argument above, running.

The rest is making this case where it gets made.

LinkedIn →