Content
@
0 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
EulerLagrangodamus -shitpost/acc
@eulerlagrange.eth
Kinda feel like using a different name for the app and protocol was a mistake. Non-crypto natives gonna be confused
9 replies
0 recast
11 reactions
Jess Sloss !!!
@jess
really? I think it was essential. Beyond making fully understanding the ecosystem a bit more complicated, whats the risk you see?
3 replies
0 recast
3 reactions
Cassie
@cndx
I agree, it is essential It's just people still get protocols confused as the dApp or product itself in my experience
1 reply
0 recast
1 reaction
EulerLagrangodamus -shitpost/acc
@eulerlagrange.eth
My POV is you want to optimize for the 90% not 10%. You can explain to the web3 crowd there’s a separation between protocol and client. Maybe a foundation leases the trademark to the client or something. Overall this would end up with less confusion, might be skewed for the first users though 😅
1 reply
0 recast
1 reaction
Cassie
@cndx
ye that's true def thinking of the 90 ++ but how much explaining is rly needed to the avg person? it's a new social platform made by farcaster (easy way, common concept, prev exp) it's also new language and concepts for most of us, so getting into the technical details (unless needed) could feel overwhelming
0 reply
0 recast
0 reaction