Farcaster

Farcaster Devs

The snap chain design is cool, but its weak point is validator election.

My concern is that once we move to system where 10 or 20 people or entities have the power to censor the network, it will eventually happen. Once we get there it will only be a matter of time, for someone to suggest that validators must censor topic A or fid B, and use social, legal or regulatory pressure to do so. 

I even guess that from day 1, there will be some geographies that implicitly or explicitly won't be able to host validators. China? Russia? Does the EU live up to the standards of the 10 voters?

Do we really think that the 6 validators (even if they are not located in the US) will not comply with a decision of a US court or regulator that asks them to censor any FID associated somehow with an OFAC-sanctioned wallet? And do we want them to have to fight this fight?

I have huge respect for the people that worked on the design, this is not an attack, but we have to have this discussion. I want to be convinced that I'm wrong.

@vrypan raises an important point about the tradeoffs of snapchains design. If we only have 10 nodes that can validate messages isn’t that bad for decentralization? 

Let’s start with the problem that Snapchain is solving. Our deltagraph network lets any hub add a new message at any time. As the network grows, failures between nodes increase and delays become inevitable. 

You have to be able to “check” your sync state with a large percentage of the network in a short amount of time and this breaks down quickly. When it does, users will complain about messages moving very slowly between apps, which will make them less likely to use Farcaster, and less likely for apps to be built.

Dad, geek, conversation liquidity provider. vrypan.net (home), /weatherxm (work), @l--o--l (fun). Also https://paragraph.xyz/@purplesubmarine

Technowatermelon. Elder Millenial. Building Farcaster. 

nf.td/varun

Have you considered doing something like an L3 and leveraging existing consensus rather than building your own?

For example, nodes could race to commit a merkle root of messages for the next epoch, let the rollup consensus decide who wins.

This is a good read, particularly the NoLeader aspect:

A doodler and computerer. I like permissive/permissionless open source, smart contracts, p2p systems, room-scale VR, and NixOS.

shazow.net

Currently: WhatsABI

This is a good read, particularly the NoLeader aspect: https://x.com/sreeramkannan/status/1841716929821856007

The NoP2P tradeoff they make is a non starter for a social network.

The premise is that p2p is done in an overlay, which doesn't need to care about sequencing or consensus because that's done in the NoP2P module.