Stephan
@stephancill
the confusion is self-induced and avoidable
2 replies
3 recasts
23 reactions
Andrei O.
@andrei0x309
LOL, DWR said that Bluesky is far more centralized than Warpcast/Farcaster. Maybe it is because nobody puts in the resources to run other networks, but everything about how BlueSky works is open. Everything is open source, feeds can be created by anybody, and GitHub and Discord communities are far more vibrant and open. It is absolutely a joke to state that Farcaster/Warpcast is more transparent, Warpcast is the definition of opaque, everything that is now open was spooned open bit by bit, and Bluesky had everything open from the get-go.
3 replies
0 recast
2 reactions
Dan Romero
@dwr.eth
What % of users use another client? How many funded indpt companies are building on the protocol? They have achieved a tremendous amount of user growh / traction. Way more than Farcaster. But to claim because vibes they are decentralized is a lazy definition.
1 reply
0 recast
3 reactions
Andrei O.
@andrei0x309
There was a point where client diversification existed and now it is practically non-existent. The whole point of having a protocol is to have many clients if you don't have many clients then a protocol is not necessary. The primary goal of a protocol is to have clients, which is more important than even users. To have as many clients as possible, everything must be opened as much as possible to foster maximum client creation, without roadblocks. To paraphrase @stephancill why have a protocol and store a cast in 1000 places when the data is read by Warpcast only, I mean at least build an open explorer to justify farcaster being a protocol. I don't know I just think the goal is to have many full clients, the clients that implemented frames 5 months ago were around 8, now I don't know if there are 2 left that can implement v2 spec, if that isn't sad I don't know what is it. Thanks for reply :)
1 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
