Content
@
0 reply
20 recasts
20 reactions
Dan Romero
@dwr.eth
Looking for honest feedback—no need to sugarcoat. What's one thing that would make the Farcaster protocol better for you?
45 replies
24 recasts
54 reactions
Liang @ degencast.wtf 🎩
@degencast.eth
having to sign in with warpcast is hard. it makes building client really difficult. If I have to create signer and pay for the gas, it would be better to delegate to a key I already have in metamask
1 reply
0 recast
2 reactions
vrypan |--o--|
@vrypan.eth
You (application) don't pay for gas, the user does. The signer key is not created onchain, the user-initiated tx to approve it is. You should not use a single key for all your users (if they revoke it, they will not be able to approve again the same key).
1 reply
0 recast
1 reaction
Liang @ degencast.wtf 🎩
@degencast.eth
user do need to pay and that is likely disincentivising
1 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
vrypan |--o--|
@vrypan.eth
It's the cost of using the blockchain :-( What would be interesting @dwr.eth, is a way for the cost to be paid by a third party, not the user. Maybe using intents in the future? (Farcaster is a could be a great intent pool, btw)
2 replies
0 recast
1 reaction
