Content
@
0 reply
20 recasts
20 reactions
Vladyslav Dalechyn
@dalechyn.eth
It's hard for people who are not at least one inch deep into the Farcaster protocol to even tell the difference between Warpcast and Farcaster. Warpcast isn't the only client, it's just the first one. Anyone is open to build another client™ make smoother UX, richer DX and win Warpcast. In a non-decentralized environment you wouldn't be able to do it.
1 reply
0 recast
19 reactions
Vladyslav Dalechyn
@dalechyn.eth
Making changes to social graph is a risky and very complex change to be done – forking should be much more endorsed to let people not just iterate on the app client looks/ideas – but also on the protocol level. I'd say it's the Step 2 for App Clients – you firstly iterate by building a "private" subset of a social graph, and only when you feel like the change is really positive and that it finds it use, you contribute to "L1". A good example of this is /uno's stories.
2 replies
0 recast
4 reactions
agusti 🐘
@bleu.eth
This all sounds ok, but then what is the actual point of building it. ontop of FC?
1 reply
0 recast
2 reactions
Vladyslav Dalechyn
@dalechyn.eth
Getting the bootstrapped social graph. Not having the burden for existing users to set up a new account, re-follow everyone they followed previously. Having lots of data to build a feed. Ultimately building in top of FC fixes the chicken-egg problem for you, and more importantly you contribute to solving it further.
3 replies
0 recast
2 reactions
christopher
@christopher
+1
0 reply
0 recast
1 reaction
agusti 🐘
@bleu.eth
I like this, thanks for changing my mind. But that sounds sufficiently decentralized? idk
1 reply
0 recast
1 reaction
agusti 🐘
@bleu.eth
yeah but it sounds to me like a lot of short-term sugar that's not really worth it if one where serious and wanted to build a bigger community. you get to 50k users in a week, and then they all abandon your app in another week, then what?
1 reply
0 recast
1 reaction
