Content
@
0 reply
20 recasts
20 reactions
Samuel
@samuellhuber.eth
Why are there so many developers on Farcaster? Why not build on 1000x larger Twitter?
3 replies
1 recast
18 reactions
Poison Ivy
@ivy
I’m not understanding the ownership point here @dwr.eth is still the bdfl, users don’t have any governance votes ie if your product depended on the old way channels work, what say did you have that is different than what say you would have at Twitter?
1 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
Dan Romero
@dwr.eth
The old channels weren’t in the protocol.
1 reply
0 recast
1 reaction
Poison Ivy
@ivy
yes my b, but for the sake of argument if they had been, it’s ultimately your / merkle’s decision right?
1 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
Dan Romero
@dwr.eth
Protocol is rough consensus and working code. Emphasis on working code part.
1 reply
0 recast
1 reaction
Samuel
@samuellhuber.eth
Ownership also means you can PR into the Hub repo or make government proposals Location in protocol wasn’t a Merkle idea to execute rn for example Solana verifications was a community proposal Long casts started with long user discussions on Farcaster and GitHub
1 reply
0 recast
1 reaction
Poison Ivy
@ivy
what you're describing is a process for contributors/contributions, not ownership until FC has W3C or optimism-like community governance ie is still under the BDFL model this is still rented ground albeit far better rented ground than the alternatives
1 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
Samuel
@samuellhuber.eth
how do you define ownership? do you own the optimism sequencer? that will control all the transactions and confirm them?
1 reply
0 recast
1 reaction
Poison Ivy
@ivy
ownership of a protocol or standards is having an active part in its governance, see IEEE or W3C no one has that here, when @warpcastadmin.eth talks about so many things built in the past being broken because of protocol changes that's a symptom of no community governance
1 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
