A lot of complaints recently that Farcaster doesn't have enough "beef".

I'm happy to fight with you.

Bluesky has more users than Farcaster and is also sufficiently decentralized.

What is the best argument for why devs should build on Farcaster instead of Bluesky?

Answering the question "where's the beef?"

/bettik founder /outercorps stalwart | ex-binance, ex-celsiusX

Threads does not fully interoperate with the fediverse, i.e. the graph is not available.

Bluesky is not in the fediverse? 

Any bridging they do could happen for Farcaster?

I'm generally bearish on a single decentralized protocol as winner take all. Think there will be a plurality.

now that threads has joined the fediverse, do you think that in 5-10 years the % of fediverse users using bluesky's primary server (assuming AT protocol fully bridged to fediverse) will be greater than the % of farcaster users using warpcast as their primary client?

this is a serious question.

Artist from the future.

NFTs since 1998.

Bitcoin since 1985.

Your second favorite artist's second favorite artist.

https://manifold.gallery/tomato

Zero users are dependent on Warpcast for hosting their core protocol data. That’s the comparison.

What % of Farcaster users use Warpcast exclusively?

*Yes, I know it's not really a fair comparison, but both networks have a lot of room to grow in the decentralization department.

Isn't it the same question as "what % of users use only Warpcast?"

@amboscoboinik does bluesky have more users? Is that verifiable?