Content
@
0 reply
20 recasts
20 reactions
Dan Romero
@dwr.eth
If you don’t like the “make money” consumer value prop for Farcaster—what do you think is better? Reply with a suggestion and rationale. Like replies that resonate.
154 replies
80 recasts
475 reactions
Pichi 🟪🍖🐹🎩 🍡🌸
@pichi
I always thought of Farcaster as a place where I’m not the product. I pay to be here and I own my data. My usage and habits aren’t being collected to be repackaged and used against me at a later date. I can’t be de-platformed, censored, or silenced. I can build what I want on top of the protocol and not worry that my access will be turned off because of a whim or impending IPO. This is the easiest and most familiar way to get into social Web3.
4 replies
5 recasts
72 reactions
Stephan
@stephancill
I love this narrative and wish it was more true about farcaster
1 reply
0 recast
4 reactions
Dan Romero
@dwr.eth
What's not true about it?
2 replies
0 recast
1 reaction
Stephan
@stephancill
The fees you pay to the network don’t go to the apps so the idea that you’re not the product is not something inherent to farcaster, it’s just typical early stage benevolence It’s also way too easy to get censored or nerfed with basically non-existent client diversity. This is forgivable in the early stages of the network but there is little to gain for others by growing the network so it’s hard to see a world where warpcast dominance diminishes over time
1 reply
0 recast
2 reactions
Dan Romero
@dwr.eth
> The fees you pay to the network don’t go to the apps so the idea that you’re not the product is not something inherent to farcaster, it’s just typical early stage benevolence How would you propose allocating the fees to the apps? > censored or nerfed Doesn't this exist on all networks -- whether web2 or decentralized? Outside of a network that is truly p2p (which will never be a mainstream consumer behavior)?
1 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
