Content
@
0 reply
20 recasts
20 reactions
boscolo.eth
@boscolo.eth
This cast got a lot more engagement than I was expecting. I've also seen some casts critical of the HUB storage payments, and there are some proposals to rework the storage unit economics. Got me thinking, is there a growing sentiment in the FC community that the current HUB model is flawed? What other approaches should be considered?
3 replies
1 recast
1 reaction
Dan Romero
@dwr.eth
1. How is it flawed? 2. What would you optimize for?
1 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
boscolo.eth
@boscolo.eth
To be clear, I'm asking the same question, not stating that it is the case. If I were to digest what I'm seeing: 1. Paying for storage is too much friction to onboard new users but not enough to slow down spam 2. Hubs aren't going to scale 2 - 3 orders of magnitude without a significant change in architecture. 3. The incentives to run a HUB are misaligned and causing congestion instead of capacity
2 replies
0 recast
0 reaction
KMacđ â©
@kmacb.eth
Some half baked thoughts. Yes, there does appear to be a growing sentiment that the current Hub model is flawed. Is it warranted? Maybe not. Imagine Ethereum with one client, Vitalik making all the decisions & no ETH token. 1- Protocol & infra software implementations have been conflated. 2- Governance over smart contracts is centralized. In short term thatâs our (ever decreasing) CAC a BDFL controls. 3- Prices are not market driven 4- âprotocolâ fee capture without explicit reinvestment. Capital allocation is a bit opaque & hasnât demonstrated support for an open ecosystem. (eg consider funding an alt hub implementation) More sync & store diversity plus market driven FID & storage pricing experiments might help. đ€·đ»ââïž All said knowing this doesnât get us more qDAU in first order but it likely drives a more diverse set of builders & potentially new economic models.
2 replies
0 recast
0 reaction
Dan Romero
@dwr.eth
Going to respond with quote cast so others can see the answers. Good questions.
0 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
