Content
@
0 reply
20 recasts
20 reactions
nyc-crypto-cabal-kid
@zinger
Hard truth: most of the replies to this complaining about how channels aren’t in the protocol are just cope Channels not in the protocol? Build your own channels. Direct casts not in the protocol? Build your own direct casts. That’s what Warpcast did. What you’ll come to realize (after a bunch of wasted time and effort) is that channels are a product problem, not an engineering one Apps that only focus on one or a few channels don’t make sense, not enough of a wedge or retention mechanism, partially due to how early we still are but also people don’t want to download a separate app for each of their interests Apps that focus on all channels and encourage you to check them individually are too much work for the user (see Discord, Telegram, etc) so you end up back with an algo feed to surface the most interesting content in one place Building a social app is a retention (and GTM) problem for the most part, not a technical one — and it’s hard as fuck https://warpcast.com/zinger/0xa6906bb7
7 replies
0 recast
115 reactions
tomu
@tomu
personally i don't understand the value prop of a channel-client. what's the retention rate for nouns x farcaster clients? exactly, it's hard as fuck you also kinda want distribution, /itookaphoto without the main feed doesn't make a lot of sense. what's the end value? to be descentralized and add monetization? hypersub and moxie are already experimenting with that, let's see how that scales first
1 reply
0 recast
3 reactions
Grit, إنشاءالله.eth
@grit
i agree with this... harshly limits discovery if channel is browsing is limited. the content problem is a real issue. not enough content thats high quality will kill a niche within a niche product.
1 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
tomu
@tomu
the main problem is product feature (channels) we don't have channels as we think they are, we are still in the hashtag phase
2 replies
0 recast
0 reaction
