Farcaster

Hey all - just wanted to share some of my concerns about the public nature of our casts/behavior on FC.

Hoping for an open dialogue on where we think this is headed, and in the long run, how to provide privacy protections from a user content perspective.

https://paragraph.xyz/@barrycollier/farcaster-content-graph

broadly speaking, there are two kinds of social networks - public (twitter, reddit) and private (facebook, snapchat) 

in a private network, encryption matters a lot because what you're saying should only be seen by trusted friends. 

in a public network, it doesn't matter because the intent is for *everyone* to see it

Technowatermelon. Elder Millenial. Building Farcaster. 

nf.td/varun

Farcaster's focus is on building a public social network.

That may change in the future, but our use case is squarely in the "i want to broadcast my thoughts as far and wide as possible" camp and not the "i'm here to talk to my friends in private camp"

(DM's are the exception here)

perpetual learner • curious builder • art lover | bazvault.eth | barrycollier.com | hosting /baz /givingflowers

i don't understand what "bad actors will take full advantage" refers to here. 

they can... read all your public posts? this is possible on twitter today if you pay for a developer account, and has been for the last decade.

I'm less concerned about my individual privacy, but more about the overall societal impact of a near zero privacy protocol at scale.

If the goal for FC is to remain a niche public network, then it's fine.

If the goal is for FC to hit 1B+ DAU, my expectation is we will see bad actors take full advantage of this

encrypted DMs seem like something that can be implemented on individual clients. And maybe it makes sense to have separate hubs/architecture for encrypted messages as an extension to the FC protocol