Content
@
0 reply
20 recasts
20 reactions
Barry
@baz.eth
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
20 replies
9 recasts
72 reactions
Dan Romero
@dwr.eth
Thanks for writing this up. The Farcaster protocol is focused on real-time, public information. Don't use it if you are worried about information being public. Anyone is free to use the graph to build a privacy-focused social network. So nothing stopping someone from building something that focuses on your goals.
2 replies
0 recast
22 reactions
Barry
@baz.eth
Thanks, Dan. I'll need to think about the implications of that more, but I think my overall concerns are still multi-fold. It's not about "my" personal data, but the growth potential and implications of a fully open content graph at scale that concerns me (as a builder). Will think on it more. Thanks for reading.
2 replies
0 recast
3 reactions
vrypan |--o--|
@vrypan.eth
How is this different than feeding all my blog posts to ChatGPT?
2 replies
0 recast
1 reaction
Barry
@baz.eth
1. It doesn't take that much data. I got a decent profile with a few hundred casts 2. I'm not talking about the impact of one person (u/me), but the impact of bad actors being able to analyze/manipulate millions at scale. Doesn't have to be perfect, just predictive If FC is never going to reach that scale, no problem
0 reply
0 recast
1 reaction
Debbie Soon
@debbie
I think the difference here is that anyone can do it on your behalf and at the moment there is no way to not make your blog posts, or in this case casts, public. Thank you for writing this out @baz.eth! Really enjoyed reading it and some food for thought for sure.
0 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
