Stephan
@stephancill
I think this mistake even exists at the protocol level. User data, links, verifications are the core social primitives that can be integrated into almost every app Casts and reactions almost feel too opinionated to sit alongside those primitives and they dominate the cost of participating in the network as a validator
3 replies
2 recasts
20 reactions
Dan Romero
@dwr.eth
Everybody wanna come up with a non-Twitter use case, nobody wanna grind for 2+ years to get retained users in a polished mobile app. The issue isn’t the tech, it’s a person that can 1) get funding 2) grind for users for years
1 reply
1 recast
29 reactions
Stephan
@stephancill
It’s tricky because the tech doesn’t matter without users but once the tech has users it’s hard to change
1 reply
0 recast
2 reactions
Dan Romero
@dwr.eth
Again, I think a sufficiently funded and motivated person would be fine with existing stuff. The limiting issue is finding someone with both. I don’t think most people realize how brutal spending multiple years growing a consumer app is. Let alone 5 years.
1 reply
0 recast
7 reactions
Stephan
@stephancill
I don’t think a sufficiently motivated person with enough funding would build a “non-twitter” use case exclusively on a protocol that is too opinionated in the first place unless it has too many users to ignore
1 reply
0 recast
2 reactions
Dan Romero
@dwr.eth
Thus the relentless focus on user growth despite complaints that we don’t focus on other things. :)
1 reply
0 recast
2 reactions
Stephan
@stephancill
I think the complaints come from a good place and are valuable regardless of your focus There is a conflict between building a protocol and seeking PMF at the same time. It seems kind of impossible to do both
1 reply
0 recast
4 reactions
