how would you define client diversity?

because warpcast, jam, and discove all feel like different flavors of the same app — with marginal advantages in functionality between them. kinda feels like the myspace v facebook v friendster era.

fwiw, how did facebook set itself apart? controlled growth.

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

/ted | exploring the onchain frontier | surfing @ venice, ca | eating @ gjusta / gjelina

Chasing Curiosity. Empathetic Accelerationist. Founding Fullstack Engineer @icebreaker. YC S16, KB7. 
icbk.me/tayyab.fc

yes, email doesn't have much diversity today. is that true during its earlier development? 

idk, market share in 07: yahoo - 250m users, hotmail - 270m, gmail - 51m. BUT gmail offered tagging and integrated IM when no others did.

fwiw gmail was announced in 04 and invite-only. the invite system was dropped in 07.

User choice. Feature sets are differentiators but look at email there isn’t too much diversity, but enough. But as things mature, things will begin to diverge esp with onchain data. 

Comes to who owns relationship with customer and why.

Agreed with point A by @df

yes, im aware of all the above. it doesn’t answer my question of how you would define client diversity.

if apps are different but the impression is that they’re not, then there’s a branding/value prop problem.

if apps are the same, then A feels like a crutch. behavior/needs vary widely across users (eg @blobs)

also, this cast was a perfect layup for you to highlight the differentiators of discove — both today's features and your vision for future features. 

idk why you chose to defend the similarities instead of pointing out the differences :)

think this has been said before but

a) without controlling invites & onboarding apps can only target this community right now
b) few app types that people use two times a day (req for vc $)
c) many apps will start with basics and add layers of new things on top; apps will look similar then diverge as they mature

@tribedotrun | @aburra $FARTS https://x.com/thebillzh

tbh the different philosophies aren’t clear enough to me so I assume (maybe wrongly) that they aren’t clear to the 12k other FC users. so, what are they?

also the 12k users can generate many different types of content beyond text. maybe those that explore this aren’t here yet, but @colin points out a few.

Don't think WC, Jam or Discove are similar - they have different philosophies around how to build their products. 

It's just that FC has only 12K users atm, so feels like there's a lot of overlap (the same content everywhere)

This will significantly change after FC has 10x'ed

They can bury me deep, but I always grow back.

right! so where is an app designed for NFT artists?!

and do we actually need to grow users before we build for them? idk, we seem to have a bunch here already: @0xen @maybeimwasabi @kazumaono.eth @pushix @incarterseyes.eth @aaronrferguson.eth @fun @ccarella.eth @antimofm.eth @anansi

+ many more (pulled from warpcast.com/dwr/0x414cd3)

clearly different ux; designed for a different user persona

ie the farcaster client for NFT artists would look far different than the one for builders

This isn’t the only way to define what you’re asking, but I hope for a future where there is huge client differentiation via user set.

Eg imagine a bunch of WC clones that only even try to differ on who theyre gated to:

+OGcaster for first 100k fID
+Tarcaster for alums of UNC
+Toadzcaster for cryptoadz holders

Analogy: wallets. 

MetaMask, CB wallet, Rainbow, Trust, etc. are all clients in a way. And I would say are pretty similar to one another. 

Winners will be who earn customer confidence faster over a longer period of time.

Would love to see diversity in the underlying usecases of the client apps vs marginal feature differences. Eg DAO usecases use Alphacaster, photography usecases use [some photo-centered client], etc.  

Trying to do that somewhat for long-form content w/ Paragraph

Backing up even further, what is the goal of client diversity? From a FC protocol perspective it might be to make sure the idea of completely malleable permissionless social graph is actually explored. From a user perspective that looks very different; do we have clones of popular apps; do we have unique exps; etc

I’d say it has something to do with differences in what they believe about the user (or different users!), not just how they solve a certain problem differently. Those beliefs shape differentiation. 

*disclaimer: I haven’t used the others you’re talking about and I’m very new here to begin with.

found a cool video on how they grew facebook!
https://youtu.be/raIUQP71SBU