Starit
@starit
294 Following
743 Followers
9 replies
10 recasts
34 reactions
0 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
0 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
1 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
0 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
1 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
0 reply
0 recast
1 reaction
1 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
0 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
0 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
0 reply
0 recast
1 reaction
0 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
Dev here. I'm against this.
Two major reasons:
- First, Farcaster, as a protocol, should treat all clients fairly. Using an official name for the app creates an unfair advantage for the Warpcast client — especially since it's already difficult to use Farcaster without Warpcast login, and data syncing is currently biased.
This is different from Uniswap's protocol/app scenario. The Uniswap app doesn't rely heavily on third-party apps to diversify its ecosystem or user experience; its core strength is liquidity. In contrast, Farcaster, as a social media protocol, clearly needs other clients to diversify its ecosystem.
Additionally, Uniswap doesn't face data syncing issues with third-party clients.
These are fundamentally different approaches—openness versus exclusivity.
- Second, In the long run, separating platforms could also be beneficial, as it might better accommodate different regulatory environments, especially if you aim for Farcaster adoption across various regions. 0 reply
1 recast
2 reactions
Dev here. I'm against this.
Two major reasons:
- First, Farcaster, as a protocol, should treat all clients fairly. Using an official name for the app creates an unfair advantage for the Warpcast client — especially since it's already difficult to use Farcaster without Warpcast login, and data syncing is currently biased.
This is different from Uniswap's protocol/app scenario. The Uniswap app doesn't rely heavily on third-party apps to diversify its ecosystem or user experience; its core strength is liquidity. In contrast, Farcaster, as a social media protocol, clearly needs other clients to diversify its ecosystem.
Additionally, Uniswap doesn't face data syncing issues with third-party clients.
These are fundamentally different approaches—openness versus exclusivity.
- Second, In the long run, separating platforms could also be beneficial, as it might better accommodate different regulatory environments, especially if you aim for Farcaster adoption across various regions. 0 reply
1 recast
2 reactions
0 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
21 replies
39 recasts
342 reactions
0 reply
0 recast
2 reactions
0 reply
0 recast
3 reactions
9 replies
13 recasts
81 reactions
1 reply
0 recast
0 reaction