df
@df
the 2 year anniversary of warpcast channels just passed and they're still not in the farcaster protocol and third party clients still can't fully build on them makes me sad insufficiently decentralized https://github.com/farcasterxyz/protocol/discussions/92
5 replies
4 recasts
41 reactions
Dan Romero
@dwr.eth
FIP-2 has been in the protocol day 1. Our version of channel metadata has not worked. No point in enshrining something that’s not working.
1 reply
3 recasts
18 reactions
df
@df
you can have permissionless channels without enshrining something that isn't working - for example make them NFTs that are used as FIP-2 targets; can always migrate to a more farcaster-opinionated approach later
1 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
Dan Romero
@dwr.eth
You can use FIP-2 with NFTs today. The first channels were NFTs. What people want with “channels” is the distribution and UX in the Farcaster app. Every iteration of the UX has failed along a major dimension in that regard. @sahil and a few others are working on a proposal to simplify and migrate existing channels into a better format.
2 replies
0 recast
3 reactions
df
@df
> the first channels were NFTs if they don’t show up as channels in waprcast and casts in them aren’t shown in warpcast, then they’re not channels, they’re just sparkling FIP-2s
1 reply
0 recast
1 reaction
Dan Romero
@dwr.eth
Right so your original point is not about being on the protocol. It’s about having a permissionless channels primitive that gives you a UX you want in the Farcaster app. That’s fine, but it’s a different thing.
1 reply
0 recast
0 reaction