Content
@
0 reply
20 recasts
20 reactions
erica
@heavygweit
settling a debate - do you agree or disagree with this statement? why? https://www.weponder.io/surveys/1816
9 replies
4 recasts
43 reactions
Dan Romero
@dwr.eth
Wave a magic wand and assume DCs are integrated and work well (both non-trivial), you still need a differentiated feature.
3 replies
1 recast
27 reactions
boscolo.eth
@boscolo.eth
I would love to see the Farcaster DC/GC protocol become an open Internet standard for E2EE private messaging. The only "sufficiently decentralized" messaging layer with a censorship resistant identity layer. Anything short of that, and we may as well just use WhatsApp or Telegram.
1 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
optimist 🎩
@gigarahul.eth
you might be interested in @comm.eth
1 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
boscolo.eth
@boscolo.eth
I'm curious to know what do you find interesting about it?
1 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
comm intern
@comm.eth
FC isn’t prioritizing e2ee for DMs in the short term (it’s a hard problem). But @comm.eth is. we’re launching next month with an encrypted & federated Discord for Farcaster. we also let users identify by their ENS username ;) would love to give you a product demo and get your thoughts!
1 reply
0 recast
2 reactions
boscolo.eth
@boscolo.eth
I'm not too interested in any products that are not based on open standards. Would your team be interested in using this spec, and helping to turn it into an open standard: https://github.com/farcasterxyz/protocol/discussions/99
1 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
