Content
@
0 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
alex
@alexgrover.eth
It feels hard to justify the $25 cost to start a new channel
13 replies
18 recasts
47 reactions
Matthew Fox 🌐
@matthewfox
that's the point
1 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
alex
@alexgrover.eth
what is? putting features that are free at the protocol level behind a paywall doesn’t make much sense to me
1 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
Matthew Fox 🌐
@matthewfox
yeah but if they were cheap/free every channel name would be gone imo its at a good point where if you really wanted to you would and if you were less serious about it you would probably pass not against that price point coming down for a user over time/based on criteria
1 reply
0 recast
1 reaction
alex
@alexgrover.eth
I think that’s the best argument, but subreddits are free and permissionless Maybe requiring people to invest some money will also make them more likely to keep posting content, but on the flip side it probably stops people from creating channels that are still too niche to work at our current scale It seems like it’s working fine for Merkle rn so no reason to change, but the fact that it’s permissionless at the protocol level just feels weird to me
1 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
Matthew Fox 🌐
@matthewfox
pretty sure its not permissionless at the protocol level yet It's publicly available but you can't create/interact with channels in any capacity other than read so still a warpcast feature really
2 replies
0 recast
0 reaction
alex
@alexgrover.eth
actually seems that I’m wrong here, they’re listed as experimental in the docs. I thought they were put onchain a couple months ago but maybe still not fully permissionless
1 reply
0 recast
1 reaction
alex
@alexgrover.eth
It is, you just set a parent_url on the cast. They just show up as “external content” on WC because WC only recognizes the ones that someone pays for
1 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
