A thought occurred to me about how FC can scale.

So the main network can store the highest priority messages, like follows. So the social graph always follow you around.

High traffic topics can be moved into a separate subnet. For example the xxx messages, and that can be subdivided further if needed…

Working on building zkTLS infra/products. A ruthless empiricist and meme connoisseur.

http://opacity.network

Not convinced this is the best approach, but it is an approach. The downside is the network splits into distinct shards, but the identity layer is the same.

So a user can always re-sign messages into a different network, or insist on the higher cost of the main network.

Similar to how Mastodon has servers but decentralize the identity layer?

Developer 🤓 build, develop and operate Farcaster solutions @ dtech.vision also love tech, decentralization, fitness and oldschool rap 😎

Never looked at it. 

I guess the federated approach is a common denominator 😅

Technowatermelon. Elder Millenial. Building Farcaster. 

nf.td/varun

Genuinely curious @v, any reason you think the federated approach wouldn’t work?

At the end of the day this can be done without really changing the FC protocol as it is today.

It's a good idea when we can no longer fit all the data on a single hub. 

But that day is very far away, I think we have 100x headroom if we are smart, and keeping everything on a single hub is very, very good devex.