Content
@
0 reply
20 recasts
20 reactions
df
@df
“A protocol is only as good as the number of independent and thriving clients … on it” https://danromero.org/product-led-protocols.html There’s no third party thriving clients. Third party client devs’ requests and wishes (like decentralizating channels) have been deprioritized for months and thus they cannot permissionlessly innovate, nor compete meaningfully on many aspects. Have you changed your mind since writing this @dwr.eth, or is Farcaster no good?
5 replies
3 recasts
20 reactions
Dan Romero
@dwr.eth
1. Farcaster itself is default dead. Existential to get growth fixed. 2. Thriving means there are sustainable businesses of which there are none (you could argue that Supercast is more sustainable that Warpcast at this point since we don't have meaningful revenue relative to costs). 3. We've been public and transparent that channels are not working in the current form and it doesn't make sense to decentralize (i.e. ossify) an incomplete primitive. The reason Nook pivoted was lack of growth, not the ability to edit channel metadata. 4. Did you bring this up at the dev meeting yesterday? 5. I see all the subcasts, fwiw.
2 replies
0 recast
7 reactions
df
@df
1. Growth is existential even for X and ethereum, so this is somewhat meaningless. We agree here tho, just not about the means to it 2. Alright so the protocol is no good atm? 3. I agree you’ve been public and transparent about that & that doing the work necessary to enable other clients to contribute to the protocol’s growth is not a priority to Warpcast. There are alternative solutions to this particular issue: an api, breaking changes to the protocol in the future, channels outside the protocol, spending time figuring out protocol channels. No solution is pursued, yet you have the resources. Many cases of devs pivoting away because they can’t provide great UX bc Warpcast isn’t prioritizing making it possible. No point building further when your app is treated as a second class citizen on the network by the dominant app. 4. I’ve brought this up before and I’m bringing it up now :) Not sure what my unavailability at 7pm yesterday (was having dinner with my grandma) has to do with this 👌
2 replies
0 recast
2 reactions
Dan Romero
@dwr.eth
1. Ethereum is a $300B market cap asset with publicly listed ETFs. Twitter was a public company and is now owned by one of the richest people in the world. That's not equivalent to a startup protocol that has yet to figure out a repeatable growth motion. 2. The protocol is not a good place to build a venture-backed business right now unless you have a long time horizon (might be useful to boostrap your new product). 3. We launched permissionless sign ups in October. Other than a brief period where Flink existed, no client is a meaningful contributor to sign ups today. Not expecting anyone else to do this, fwiw. Thus product-led protocol growth. We did spend time on protocol channels in May and they had no impact (and possibly negative impact). So we rotated to focus on the upstream problems of content supply and feed algo. Solve the most important problem, not the feel good problem. 4. So we should schedule the protocol meetings around your schedule vs. everyone else? Not sure how this is relevant.
1 reply
0 recast
1 reaction
Garrett
@garrett
Why isn't there a program to get reimbursed or even rewarded for onboarding new users to FC? If there was then I think it would make more sense for apps to leverage FC for profile/account/social graph instead of building it themselves
1 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
Dan Romero
@dwr.eth
1. How do you prevent spam / fraud? 2. What happens when someone in the program disputes that the users they are onboarding are spammy? 3. Sign ups are not valuable -- retained non-spammy daily active users are. And even then, the network needs to increase the supply of interesting content to increase average user retention.
1 reply
0 recast
1 reaction
Garrett
@garrett
1. Spam/Fraud is pervasive on social platforms. It comes with the territory but there’s ways to introduce identity requirements or anti-sybil requirements to get reimbursed/rewarded 2. Make the requirements clear and maybe make this an application process. Anything sort of program would be better than nothing 3. You need signups to have a chance at retaining daily active users. Signups come before retention. Enabling a program like this would allow builders to create more surface areas on the network for more content TLDR: These aren’t good enough reasons to have no program or mechanism for people to leverage the FC social graph and get reimbursed or rewarded for onboarding people. Even a better grassroots word of mouth onboarding system would be better than nothing we have today
1 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
