Warpcast

⏰ Warpcast Status

- Failed to publish messages for a few hours to hubs 
- Fix going out now
- will share an ETA on how long it will take to cleanup shortly

cc @rish @woj.eth

makes me think: does having one main client pose a risk for all other farcaster participants? what's stopping warpcast from not publishing at all? are there disincentives?

there's a massive risk for anyone/company that builds on fc unless there's resilience built into the protocol.

makes me think: does having one main client pose a risk for all other farcaster participants? what's stopping warpcast from not publishing at all? are there disincentives?

there's a massive risk for anyone/company that builds on fc unless there's resilience built into the protocol.

https://warpcast.com/v/0x292a2d66

Yes, we need more clients. That’s what we’re trying to accelerate. 

Re: other 2 qs - think through the game theory implications of 
- “What would happen if Gmail stopped sending emails or delayed emails to non-Gmail providers?”
- “What would happen if T-Mobile stopped sending texts to Verizon customers”

🪐 Building @neynar, join us in /neynar

Why do you think a minority client is intrinsically disincentivized to publish all messages to the network?

On the contrary, @woj.eth would be super pissed (pun intended) if his customers weren’t getting to reach majority client distribution levels.

yep, makes sense. there'll be a intrinsic disincentive if warpcast becomes the minority client. but i really only see that happening if the fc protocol deviates or broadens in scope from the wc vision.

at the moment the game theory is closer to "what if reddit turns off it's api access?"

another thought: in your examples, the clients need to be able to message everyone in the protocol - while on FC, you only need to send it to the most people. 

this is where i see the game theory here being a bit more tricky. feels like there needs to be a solution within the protocol itself.