Content
@
0 reply
0 recast
1 reaction
0xdesigner
@0xdesigner
ironically leaving farcon more bearish on farcaster. the protocol wants to compete and win at the client level. clients want to win and avoid being dependent on the protocol. all roads lead to winner take all. what’s the point?
36 replies
3 recasts
93 reactions
Dan Romero
@dwr.eth
Wrote up my thoughts here. Thanks for the nudge. https://warpcast.com/dwr.eth/0x16de8c53
1 reply
0 recast
3 reactions
0xdesigner
@0xdesigner
say you're able to grow qDAU and successfully empower other clients (hypothetically). another client (a non twitter clone) achieves escape velocity user growth, far exceeding any other on the protocol. why wouldn't they fork farcaster? they could presumably achieve consensus of the new thing with enough scale.
4 replies
0 recast
2 reactions
Dan Romero
@dwr.eth
Sure. So then maybe it’s long-term useful to have a good client that ultimately cares about the protocol and isn’t just a reference client. ;)
1 reply
0 recast
3 reactions
Joonatan | Phaver CEO
@joonatan.eth
For @phaverapp we do of course aim at escape velocity and have our standalone graph besides Lens and Farcaster but I see no upside in a fork as network effects are a net positive for us anyway. Only if Dan or Stani go evil then we have the insurance and that’s the real point of web3 graphs for me.
1 reply
0 recast
2 reactions
Austin
@austinmccollom
What does the successful client gain by forking the protocol?
1 reply
0 recast
1 reaction
Nicolaus
@nicolaus
This growth & fork you’re describing actually sounds like a win for Farcaster. Someone who has successfully used FC to build a unique product vision with enough DAU is likely to do just that. People building on Farcaster will continue its growth by making it easier for more successes like that to happen.
1 reply
0 recast
0 reaction