Content
@
0 reply
0 recast
2 reactions
Daniel Lombraña
@teleyinex.eth
A long time ago, I wrote about Lens vs Farcaster https://paragraph.xyz/@teleyinex.eth/farcaster-vs-lens-protocol. The time has come to write about the Farcaster vs AT protocol https://paragraph.xyz/@teleyinex.eth/farcaster-vs-at-protocol The blog post analyzes how both protocols are built from the technical point of view. I hope you like it.
2 replies
1 recast
12 reactions
shazow
@shazow.eth
Would enjoy a deeper dive! Some corrections: I believe Bluesky also uses CRDTs as part of its Automerge protocol, and CIDs are also data hashes just like Farcaster. They have more in common than the article implies. :)
2 replies
0 recast
1 reaction
shazow
@shazow.eth
Also I think the FIDs can be fully owned by the user's wallet, so not kinda decentralized? Need to confirm. The main weaknesses of Bluesky is the recovery keys are custodied unless you run your own PDS, and the name resolving directory is centralized.
0 reply
0 recast
1 reaction
Daniel Lombraña
@teleyinex.eth
I couldn't find more info on their docs. Maybe they have it in a different place. Thanks for the corrections.
1 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
