Dan Romero on Warpcast

Dan Romero pfp

Should an app and a protocol be named the same or different things? Uniswap is the app (website and now mobile app) and a protocol. This hasn't stopped developers from building on the Uniswap protocol. In addition, in the previous cycle, many consumers wanting to trade tokens onchain used the Uniswap website. Others used wallets with swap functionality built on the permisionless Uniswap protocol. For NFTs, the app and protocol were split—OpenSea and Seaport. However, since it was a consumer app, the brand being the thing consumers heard about meant that OpenSea was easier to find and onboard to. No one except for developers knew about Seaport. (Fair to say Seaport is less important protocol than Uniswap.) Email and the web both have strong protocol branding that's independent of the clients. Same goes for Ethereum, and a lesser degree Solana (in the case of wallets).

34 replies

17 recasts

148 reactions

Dan Romero pfp

Without a clear consumer-branded app, it's very hard to grow the number of *consumers*. Even L1 blockchains struggle with this -- Ethereum is the exception to the rule, maybe Solana -- Bitcoin wallet adoption never took off (most Bitcoin was bought on CEX) and other L1s really struggle with onboarding. Increasingly, you're seeing L2s build their own wallet -- World, Uni, Abstract, Blast -- and would expect that trend to continue. Most consumers—not developers!—don't want to have to navigate the nuances of app vs. protocol. They just want to download the thing their friend told them about and get the primary benefit promised.

1 reply

3 recasts

58 reactions

Brock pfp

@runninyeti.eth

The difference is Uniswap is protocol first - many other protocols have been built atop and forked from it. Incentives for Uniswap are at the contract / protocol level This is also true for Seaport - trading NFTs on Blur still leads to revenue for OpenSea ^ in both cases, competitive apps are encouraged because it's net positive for the protocol -> net positive for revenue In Merkle's case, the key metrics seem to be app-level (?). In which case, consumer branding is necessary and competitive apps are a net negative

1 reply

0 recast

3 reactions

Joshua Salles pfp

As I said on @v's cast, I vote for keeping things the same or at the very least keeping the name Farcaster 🥲 Warpcast & Farcaster can be bundled better to help with the confusion, I mean the Lens protocol and their users seemed to have figured things out! Surely we can 🥹

1 reply

0 recast

0 reaction

pugson pfp

i’ve never seen or heard “Seaport” being used by anyone

1 reply

0 recast

9 reactions

Jawa pfp

I lean toward names that are close but not identical. “Caster” to me implies a client. What if the protocol was Farcast & the Client Farcaster? There’s some distinction but less room for overall confusion. Searching for one will find the other in app stores which is crucial.

1 reply

1 recast

4 reactions

Nicholas pfp

Farcaster & the Farcaster Protocol is probably sufficient differentiation, devs will get into the weeds with the jargon and understand the differences

0 reply

0 recast

4 reactions

$ALEX Masmej pfp

@alexmasmej.eth

Absolutely. Warpcast should be renamed Farcaster, way more catchy IMO. Farcaster app and protocol by Merkle. Less words to remember for @dylanabruscato!

1 reply

0 recast

2 reactions

llamafacts pfp

@llamafacts.eth

I know a bunch of fc devs. I'm sure most of them would prefer a different name just because they want to support an OPEN protocol. It can be as trivial as "the Farcaster protocol". But it has to be different. Many of them have been building on Farcaster for long time and even if you choose to have a single name they'll still be here. But... Just do the right thing. 👍🏼

0 reply

0 recast

2 reactions

Sean Wince 🎩 pfp

Sean Wince 🎩

Glad you're thinking about this. I was on Farcaster before the name "Warpcast" was a thing, and I still like the former name better. I tell people to get on Farcaster. But then need to clarify that Warpcast is the app to download. Would be nice to avoid possible confusion

0 reply

0 recast

2 reactions

J. Valeska 🦊🎩🫂 pfp

J. Valeska 🦊🎩🫂

first time read seaport I thought it was a scam, diff names are confusing, yeah tho, uniswap launched unichain now, not uniswap chain, same for base/coinbase diff names, some confussion too when speaking to begginners but there are diff things that may need distinction fun fact: there are launchpads that are "clients" of uniswap and farcaster like clanker

0 reply

0 recast

1 reaction

JC pfp

@jonathancolton

One brand = no confusion! Go for it!

0 reply

0 recast

1 reaction

C O M P Ξ Z pfp

From a developer’s perspective, a protocol is a standard that should have its own distinct identity. There is no need for it to share the same name as the product or application built on top of it. The independence of a protocol from clients is a fundamental principle that ensures broader adoption, greater scalability, and long-term stability.

0 reply

0 recast

1 reaction

Tayyab - d/acc pfp

Genuinely, is there proof that people choose not to adopt Warpcast because of the name? Or that current branding is Farcaster based, and the front door right now is just Warpcast? Seems like a whole we’ve dig ourselves into, and need a way out.

0 reply

0 recast

0 reaction

Chinmay 🧺 📈 pfp

Chinmay 🧺 📈

Farcaster.org App.farcsster.org

0 reply

0 recast

0 reaction

CHRIS DOLINSKI pfp

Farcaster is far better +1 for same name

0 reply

0 recast

0 reaction

Jason pfp

It’s all Farcaster all the way down

0 reply

0 recast

0 reaction

S·G 🎩↑◡̈ pfp

S·G 🎩↑◡̈

Keep it simple. https://warpcast.com/esdotge.eth/0x7282f084

0 reply

0 recast

0 reaction

Michael of St. Joseph 🔏 pfp

Michael of St. Joseph 🔏

@michaelofstjoe

https://warpcast.com/michaelofstjoe/0x414a49d4

0 reply

0 recast

0 reaction

ebeezy pfp

I like when they’re the same thing. From my understanding, devs dgaf about the name. I like Farcaster for consumers and Farcaster Protocol for devs But I also really do like warpcast so :/

0 reply

0 recast

0 reaction