Neynar

Celebrating the experimental launch of hubs.neynar.com

strong opinion, weakly held: client devs should not run Hubs (they should run a Replicator)

- Hubs are expensive
- point Replicator to nemes, StandardCrypto, Neynar
- Replicator is copy of all (verified) data, without overhead of CRDT, syncing, network spam
- SQL is more flexible+expressive than Hub HTTP API or gRPC

working @ /neynar   🪐  casting @ /rish

haardik.dev | education @learnweb3 | cooking @ nucleo finance

likes building things • https://alexgrover.me/links

https://SassyHash.artlu.xyz/download

The Once and Future /arthur /bcbhshow. FOSS at GH:artlu99.

PFP is my Native.fun Print, genart unique hash of wallet txns

@alexgrover.eth @haardikkk and @rish comments have convinced me to turn my perspective 180 degrees

Dad, geek, conversation liquidity provider. vrypan.net (home), /weatherxm (work), @l--o--l (fun). Also https://paragraph.xyz/@purplesubmarine

tagging @vrypan.eth  for more obs about Hubs utility. Reading from Replicator, writing to Hubs may result in unavoidable async nastiness

1. if we have a robust protocol, 2-3 dedicated orgs, >20 live Hubs, users get to free-ride on the decentralization, no? (a real Question!)

2,3. the async nastiness is mostly in UX (imo), users are used to TG/FB/X/Discord being near-instantaneous sync at 100000x scale

1. It's ok, if you don't mind about censorship resistance and self-sovereignty.
2. Replicator is ok for reads, but you will need one more integration to change the state.
3. "Async nastiness" is the beauty of decentralized hubs: at any given point in time, most hubs are not 100% in sync, but they eventually converge.