Varun Srinivasan
@v
An interesting Farcaster idea: what if apps paid for storage, not users? - Apps buy a chunk of bytes. - Free to allocate to casts, reactions, follows in any way. - Free to assign to users in any way (fixed rate, free) - Lower cost by avoiding "unused storage" h/t to @vrypan.eth @deodad and @sds
23 replies
73 recasts
428 reactions
Stephan
@stephancill
This model feels wrong Farcaster users don’t necessarily have a relationship with a single app. What happens when the user decides to stop using the app that pays for their storage? Feels like there’s an incentive misalignment
1 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
Varun Srinivasan
@v
you'd just migrate your data to another app. sort of like if you stopped paying your email or hosting provider. this problem exists in a similar form with signers today btw, and is solvable.
2 replies
0 recast
0 reaction
Stephan
@stephancill
Under the current architecture users always own their storage so it doesn’t matter which apps they use, they are in full control of their data Under the new model the way I understand it the user would need to actively manage their storage broker and would be at risk of getting their data rugged at any time? This has a similar UX trade off to federation without the benefit of less storage load on the network Please correct me if any of the assumptions I’m making here are incorrect
1 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
jj 🛟
@jj
Even if you stop paying for your email server each email client at least on desktop can download and save all the data creating a backup. Then resync the data to any other email provider. I think this is a read only problem that’s tied to the writes.
0 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
