Dan Romero
@dwr.eth
1. Paying for storage is too much friction to onboard new users but not enough to slow down spam > We experimented with free sign ups in a number of countries and rentention was significantly lower than users who paid the $5 to sign up. 2. Hubs aren't going to scale 2 - 3 orders of magnitude without a significant change in architecture. > We've said from the beginning we think Hubs scale without sharding to ~10M daily active users, give or take. Scaling is hard, but the existential problem is getting the actual retained users. :) 3. The incentives to run a HUB are misaligned and causing congestion instead of capacity > There are no incentives? Adding incentives would increase the number of Hubs. The team is exploring how to reduce congestion. Possibly increasing economic cost of running a Hub (since access to the network is valuable). Nothing definitive yet. See also my cast below On Hubs: https://warpcast.com/dwr.eth/0x2d7823b4
4 replies
4 recasts
25 reactions
Ese π³
@esss
Why not adhere in a deeper way to the eth infra, proof of stake seems to work with alignment of eth validators in the network, maybe even some kind of optimistic rollup? But going onchain could solve some spam issues, with a harder to retain user base but, some users already buy storage directly with crypto using @caststorage for example
1 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
Dan Romero
@dwr.eth
What are you validating?
2 replies
0 recast
1 reaction