woj ツ on Warpcast

Content pfp

0 reply

20 recasts

20 reactions

woj ツ pfp

degen and ham chains were mistakes and they set the whole farcaster ecosystem back im posting this after reaching out to @jacek and @deployer privately, but since they both answered that they have no plans on sunsetting the chains, i want to give a heads up to all other teams building their economies on farcaster: don't launch you own chains 1. fc ecosystem only has a chance to work if there is a lot of liquidity in one place 2. separate chains fragment the liquidity and only benefit the passive token holders (less sell pressure) and mev bot operators (arbitrage between chains and pools). actual users pay in UX, mev and fees 3. devs who want to launch integrations with these projects are fucked because most infrastructure providers don't support these small chains im building supercast wallet and it's beyond frustrating to see how close we were to having something truly great and how much harder it is to build a good UX on top of these projects because they selfishly decided to launch their own chains

75 replies

35 recasts

257 reactions

woj ツ pfp

also doesn't serve me to say this because i have money in both projects, and it probably costs me some friendship points with jacek and deployer but i feel very strongly about this and i want others to avoid following this path just build on base, it's already hard enough

8 replies

6 recasts

116 reactions

sean pfp

why is pushing the limits of current infra technology selfish? this is a weird take from someone building on new technology for early adopters. there will always be pain points when building at this forward end of the technology curve building many chains is the entire growth strategy that the ethereum foundation has chosen to pursue. it won't all magically happen with all the pieces working at the same time. someone has to build new things first. i'm glad those people are a part of farcaster ask alchemy or infura to support them, don't stop the builders

2 replies

1 recast

24 reactions

Nick T pfp

only cast on Warpcast guys, let's keep all the attention liquidity in one place instead of fragmented. sucks having to support multiple clients as a dev 😵

1 reply

0 recast

16 reactions

Corbin Page pfp

Respectfully disagree. You're feeling the same thing any wallet/app builder is dealing with wrt multiple chains right now. The FC ecosystem is a small subset of the annoyances of building across 10s of EVM chains and even the altVMs as well. Chain abstraction makes this A LOT easier (cc @decentxyz) but this is the market figuring out what works and what doesn't. It's decentralized coordination playing out.

2 replies

1 recast

23 reactions

Rob Sanchez pfp

have some similar annoyances - for paybot commands (e.g "@paybot 100 degen") we don't know if the user wants to send it on base or the L3, so we need to make assumptions based on their balances - supporting tokens on degen L3 in @swapbot is hard because it's not supported in 0x.org (which is a great product and we love) more complexity and worse ux in general

3 replies

1 recast

11 reactions

whimsi pfp

u forgot to superanon

2 replies

0 recast

8 reactions

jacopo.eth pfp

have you looked into chain abstraction solutions?

1 reply

0 recast

0 reaction

Jonny Mack pfp

same situation w/ embedded wallets. lots of incentives to launch your own chain. 0 incentives not to. tragedy of the commons

3 replies

0 recast

7 reactions

Matthew Fox 🌐 pfp

Matthew Fox 🌐

We did this from day 1 of DL3 w/jeeves Eh it's not pleasant sometimes (most bugs after were DL3 adjacent) but i dont think its reason for them to not exist Although infra not supporting ham was the only reason we didn't support ham It's definitely easier to handle with smart wallets than EOAs

1 reply

0 recast

7 reactions

DV pfp

@degenveteran.eth

This is definitely a difficult situation that will be looked back on as this is all ground breaking...I'm glad I'm here for it. my question is... Aside from sunsetting those two chains... What are your top 3 priorities you would like the community to focus on?

1 reply

0 recast

1 reaction

Jaack pfp

Unless it's all abstracted away, and the liquidity unified. But it's still gonna take some time..

1 reply

0 recast

2 reactions

tldr (tim reilly) pfp

tldr (tim reilly)

Still love degen of course, but from someone building on top of it I agree with this take. Degen chain has only caused us headaches, not upside. Would be curious what @kenny thinks as a builder who actually integrated degen chain into a working product.

1 reply

1 recast

32 reactions

Will Papper pfp

I of course have a point of view here, but only because it comes from a deeply-held belief that communities should be able to own their chains. On the integrations side, people were saying the same thing about L2s being more difficult to integrate than ETH Mainnet. Ultimately, fee reductions and the subsequent user demand led the infrastructure providers to add multi-chain support, but it assumed a few large L2s. Now that we're seeing the proliferation of many L2s and L3s, infrastructure providers will need to evolve again. Just like how L1 -> a few big L2s required some work to operate smoothly, a few big L2s -> many L2s and L3s will require work as well. So where does the user demand come from? In my opinion, it's things that are impossible on large L2s. Ham putting FID data onchain is the perfect example. Only a tiny fraction of the world is onchain. If we don't pursue L2s and L3s, we will hold back the space in its onchain potential. Moving more communities onchain is why many L2s and L3s must exist.

1 reply

2 recasts

8 reactions

Mark Carey 🎩🫂 pfp

Mark Carey 🎩🫂

As developer, I appreciate the argument of added complexity and UX challenges for multi-chain. The liquidity fragmentation argument is weaker since it is the main argument against the Ethereum's chosen scaling approach. Following this argument, everyone should use Ethereum Mainnet: we'd be able to minimize liquidity fragmentation and as developers, our lives would be easier and users would have better UX. But it would cost $50 to mint/claim anything and there would be about 10 users. You have omitted the benefits of these smaller L3 chains. Yes, there is a cost of less infra support, but there are benefits for both projects and users. It is a trade-off. As one example, my /pixelnouns project on Degen chain. I have paid the gas for 34,000+ transactions, providing a **better** UX for users by eliminating the need for wallet interactions -- they mint by hitting a button in frame. As an unfunded indie dev, the project would not be possible on /base. Multichain abstraction is the answer, not "one chain only".

0 reply

1 recast

9 reactions

Kyle Patrick pfp

@kylepatrick.eth

Woj, I think you forgot to put this on superanon jk

0 reply

0 recast

6 reactions

𝑶𝒕𝒕𝒊🎩🌊 pfp

𝑶𝒕𝒕𝒊🎩🌊

This is true but what then happens to freedom of innovation? Everything even base was once a startup chain.

1 reply

0 recast

5 reactions

Brian Kim pfp

0 reply

0 recast

3 reactions

Jacob pfp

big crypto pain point is the high cost of sponsoring fees to improve ux, and provide seamless account abstraction the L3s seem to have solved that, but added developer work bc new infra base can solve this for apps with few txs, but sponsoring ~8 cents per user tx is not practical for most onchain apps why not both?

0 reply

0 recast

2 reactions

czar pfp

the more appropriate question in my opinion is - was it the right time to launch these chains? well intentioned ideas from smart people are generally good, it’s just the timing for most.

0 reply

0 recast

2 reactions