Content pfp
Content
@
0 reply
20 recasts
20 reactions

David Furlong pfp
David Furlong
@df
The Farcaster protocol does very little today in the way of solving conflicts or UX problems around multiple competing clients; which, one might expect, is the hard & important thing to solve in a social protocol. Farcaster is being controlled & governed by the 99% client (Warpcast), repeatedly making choices that limit the ability of alternate clients to build and compete (See SIWF, Messaging, Channels). As a builder, it's unclear why Farcaster is not any different from early Twitter, which was open, had alt clients, but one overwhelmingly dominant client. Once Twitter became big enough, it shifted from attracting to extracting, and shut down their API, becoming the Twitter of today, ruled by a benevolent dictator. Is Farcaster/Warpcast just running back the Twitter playbook? Why should we users and builders trust Warpcast's continued benevolence, when their short term choices are already showing a willingness to compromise on the Protocol part in the name of monoclient growth?
13 replies
35 recasts
126 reactions

rish pfp
rish
@rish
sorry decentralized hubs and onchain identities are not the same as twitter APIs Yes there are some things that aren't on the protocol yet but that's not the same as saying the whole thing is centralized and can be pulled away like Twitter seems to be written overly dramatic in one direction to create a conversation maybe? not sure
2 replies
1 recast
4 reactions

links šŸ“ pfp
links šŸ“
@links
Itā€™s a valid point. MM controls the whole network because they control both the dominant client and the code the hubs run. If the FIP process was less centralized, would it hit your need? The SV adage of ā€œmove fast and break thingsā€ seems incompatible with the the added time for bottom-up consensus, but perhaps it would ensure the long-term health of the network.
1 reply
0 recast
3 reactions

Jacob pfp
Jacob
@jrf
sufficient decentralization? you'd know better than me, do you have an answer to your question
1 reply
0 recast
1 reaction

ā€‹woj pfp
ā€‹woj
@woj.eth
there is a lot of other projects that put decentralization and open access on the first spot, but farcaster / warpcast proved to be the most useful to build on top of > Why should we users and builders trust Warpcast's continued benevolence... warpcast never did anything malicious, all the problems can be attributed to priorities ā€” if merkle had an infinite dev hours at disposal today, i don't see a part of the roadmap that is killing supercast
2 replies
1 recast
2 reactions

maurelian  pfp
maurelian
@maurelian.eth
What is centralized about SIWF, or rather, could someone else not build an alternative to it?
1 reply
0 recast
0 reaction

Tony Dā€™Addeo  pfp
Tony Dā€™Addeo
@deodad
an open API isn't any different than blockchain hosted identities cryptographically writing to a decentralized network of hubs? come on
1 reply
0 recast
1 reaction

hellno the optimist pfp
hellno the optimist
@hellno.eth
ā€¦but we have hubs? šŸ˜‚
0 reply
0 recast
3 reactions

Matthew Fox šŸŒ pfp
Matthew Fox šŸŒ
@matthewfox
Can't even find the energy to refute at this point, so tired of this narrative šŸ˜Ŗ Don't like it now? Come back in a few years Every point has been discussed ad nauseam, intentions & reservations have been laid out Jobs not done, that's the only conclusion
2 replies
0 recast
2 reactions

Liang @ degencast.wtf šŸŽ© pfp
Liang @ degencast.wtf šŸŽ©
@degencast.eth
I feel you bro
0 reply
0 recast
1 reaction

Jacob pfp
Jacob
@jrf
@atlas summarize thread
1 reply
0 recast
0 reaction

czar  pfp
czar
@czar
atleast the stated reason is not ā€œin the name of monoclient growthā€. it is to get users on the protocol, without which none of what anyone else does matters. you may not agree with the approach taken to grow protocol users, but you can understand that it is one of the paths?
1 reply
0 recast
0 reaction

KMacšŸŒ ā© pfp
KMacšŸŒ ā©
@kmacb.eth
We are all Fā€™d if they are running the twitter playbook. I donā€™t think thatā€™s the case anymore; it all changed when Elon bought the bird. (@cameron had an insight about this topic. Maybe heā€™ll share it here) Breakup the obese protocol. Eliminate WC dependencies. Developers Developers Developers They will help grow protocol dau.
0 reply
0 recast
1 reaction

Leeward Bound pfp
Leeward Bound
@leewardbound
cabal is big mad, many devs who received merkel funding angry in the replies, don't let up pressure, you are a king and there's zero lies here
0 reply
0 recast
0 reaction