df
@df
There's a reason telegram mini apps mostly suck, although telegram is a protocol and has hundreds of millions of daily active human users it's not a credibly neutral protocol, and is controlled by a for profit company with the same name there's a lesson in there
10 replies
1 recast
34 reactions
df
@df
When building web3 protocols, we should hold ourselves to a higher bar than web2 platforms - otherwise we risk just recreating the same user-misaligned incentive systems that brought us here. "Don't be evil" is not good enough. "Can't be evil" should be the bar. Web2 platform's classic S-curve playbook of attract-extract is the reason I'm building in web3 and trying to contribute to protocols that replace platforms. Unfortunately due to little user traction there's a lot of compromises being made lately, with a "trust me later, bro" attitude which I think there needs to be some pushback on from people who are volunteering and contributing to growing something they think will be a public good
0 reply
1 recast
12 reactions
Stephan
@stephancill
i think there are more telling reasons tbh - no feed for miniapps to leverage for distribution - no open social graph - TON is a ghost chain (probably bc devex is terrible) credible neutrality is important for long term sustainability but there is lots of precedent for thriving mini app ecosystems on centralized platforms e.g. facebook, discord, and maybe twitter/reddit if you consider third party apps in general
2 replies
1 recast
11 reactions
๐ถ๐๐๐๐ฉ๐
@toyboy.eth
Telegram Mini Apps could have been a thriving ecosystem like web apps or even early Facebook appsโbut because theyโre ultimately subject to Telegram-the-companyโs whims, thereโs a ceiling on trust and innovation. Developers hesitate to invest deeply when the ground beneath them could shift overnight.
1 reply
0 recast
4 reactions
limone.eth ๐
@limone.eth
i guess you're team Warpcast + Farcaster vs. everything Farcaster? ahahah
1 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
Tony DโAddeo
@deodad
counter points: app store, play store
0 reply
0 recast
3 reactions
Hoot ๐ฉ
@owl
With a chain attached that is โtotally not telegramโ ๐
0 reply
0 recast
1 reaction
Timur Badretdinov
@destiner.eth
thatโs a really good point tho i remember at some point telegram was trying to attract SMBs by adding features like opening hours and location SMBs could really leverage mini apps for e.g. booking but the adoption never materialized
0 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
Rune Balto
@balto
Do you really think that's what it is I just think that telegram is a horrible thing to get into. I don't know anybody that uses it. And if they do they're probably just like doing weird stuff and never using it again. maybe it is but I would look more at the oversaturation that has caused everything to be the same. Because there's no games coming out that is unique they're all the same thing. I kind of like that BOMBIE one it's just so mindless and you're not really getting anything out of it it's not like you're collecting NFTs anything. I'm still on wax you know I like to get the NFTs even if they're not worth a lot it makes me feel like I'm special
0 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
gentlegeeboss.base.eth
@dgentle01
The apps there were majorly built to earn by devs. They needed more users without a good plan on how to retain them. Bringing in buntch of inexperienced web2 users that think web3 is a get rich quick scheme.
0 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
Koolkheart
@koolkheart.eth
We all want public goods, but until public goods are funded like private ones, compromise will win. Whatโs the actual incentive fix here?
0 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
