decentralization just is a means to an end. it basically does not matter if the protocol is decentralized if there is only one dominant client

furthermore, there is very little incentive for a dominant client to give up market share once it captures the market

we should be aiming to build credibly neutral platforms where incentives between users, developers, and platforms are aligned. if we're not doing that then we may as well be using centralized social platforms instead of replaying the same movie we've seen the ending of a dozen times already

This is probably the most important question for the long-term health and sustainability of Farcaster: how can it achieve meaningful decentralization if there's one extremely dominant client (Warpcast)?

Without client decentralization Farcaster risks going the route of web2 social apps that started off with an open ethos but grew more centralized over time. And to achieve client decentralization there needs to be real incentives and opportunities for alt-client builders, which don't really exist today.

Great discussion about this from @df @stephancill and others

Building FOSS via @frames, /open-frames to help decentralized social win. a16z CSX23. farcasterchannels.com farcaster.id

cypherpunk wannabe, engineer working on @frames /open-frames /opencast
https://stephancill.co.za create stories at https://stories.steer.fun