@farcaster

On Redefining “Builder” 𝘵𝘩𝘰𝘶𝘨𝘩𝘵𝘴 𝘧𝘳𝘰𝘮 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘧𝘢𝘳𝘤𝘢𝘴𝘵𝘦𝘳 𝘪𝘯𝘵𝘦𝘳𝘯 When I think about Rome, the first thing that comes to mind is not the engineers who built it. The Colosseum was built to seat 80,000 people and still stands two thousand years later. It is one of the greatest engineering feats in human history. But that's not why we still talk about it. It was a political statement, a social contract, an entertainment platform, and a cultural institution all at once. Engineers built it. Politicians funded it. Artists decorated it. Writers immortalized it. What made it legendary wasn't the blueprint or the concrete. It was the layers. Every kind of builder left something of themselves in it, in whatever way they knew how. Then there's Augustus, the first Roman emperor, who once boasted that he found Rome a city of brick and left it a city of marble. But he didn't just mean the buildings. He meant the laws. The literature. The culture. He commissioned Virgil to write the Aeneid, one of the greatest epic poems ever written, alongside the needed physical reconstruction of the city. He understood that a civilization is built out of stories and systems as much as stone. And then there's Michelangelo on his back for four years painting the Sistine Chapel ceiling. He was commissioned as a sculptor, not a painter. He complained the whole time. He had no business being up there by the conventional definition of his craft. And what he made became one of the most studied and visited works in human history. Not because of the building. Because of what someone brought to it from completely outside the expected discipline, and the people that attracted. Jump to today and builder has become someone who writes code and creates software. And those people are essential. But I think it's important to remember that the term didn't always have such a narrow definition. And I think it's important that we broaden it again. Rome didn't get built by one kind of person and neither does anything worth building. AI hasn't just made building faster. It's made it weirder. More unexpected. The person I least expect is suddenly the one building the most interesting thing. I see it every day on Farcaster. Someone comes here to share their art and ends up building a community. Someone builds a community and ends up building a product. Someone builds a product and ends up building a movement. What we set out to build and what we actually build often aren't the same thing, and maybe that's always been the point. Michelangelo came to Rome as a sculptor. Augustus came to power as a general. A builder is someone who makes something and puts it into the world. The work looks different but the intent is the same: to create something that didn't exist before. Not everyone is a builder. There's real work involved, whatever form that takes. But anyone can be, and the category is wider than it's been treated, and I think it should only get wider. I don't know where the next interesting thing is going to come from. But that's a feature not a bug. The more accessible building becomes, the more interesting the ideas will be. Farcaster can be the place where people tinker and find their craft. Where a sculptor figures out they are also a painter. Where someone who thought they were just a community organizer realizes they've been building a product the whole time. So when I say builder, I mean yes to the engineer. Yes to the artist. Yes to the community organizer, the writer, the person who shows up every day and makes something better. Yes and, not instead of. None of this is to say that building for everyone means building for no one. As the team stewarding Farcaster we still have to make real product choices, real bets on who we're building for. But there's a difference between your target and your culture. And the culture we want is one that recognizes and celebrates every kind of builder, including the ones we don't even know yet. I think about Rome not for any single builder but for the accumulation of everyone who showed up and made something. The marble and the poetry. The aqueducts and the Aeneid. All of it built the same place. Writing this is part of my own building process. As is seeing what gets shaped in the replies, and what trickles through group chats, and what makes its way out into the world. Rome wasn't built in a day. Neither is this. But the reason we still talk about Rome is because enough different kinds of people cared enough to leave something of themselves in it. The more different kinds of builders you invite in, the stronger and more interesting the thing becomes. I think we're still at the beginning of finding out what that looks like for Farcaster. And I think the definition of builder is worth getting right. What are you building?

29 replies

36 recasts

204 reactions