timdaub on Farcaster

sean pfp

whoa https://twitter.com/DefiIgnas/status/1680921857271398400

3 replies

0 recast

0 reaction

Cameron Armstrong pfp

Cameron Armstrong

I still need to dive into exactly what is technically happening, but if you need to keep abstracting away the crypto layers of your app I don’t think I understand the point of you building it onchain? Or at least the way you’re putting it onchain? Feels like an architecture redesign makes more sense but idk

1 reply

0 recast

1 reaction

sean pfp

I agree. To be fair to them, it sounds kinda like FC hubs, so they aren’t alone. In either case, I don’t think the non-blockchain networks will last long term anyway, because the economics will eventually force them to centralize, federate, or go to blockchains with built in hosting compensation mechanisms

3 replies

0 recast

0 reaction

Dan Romero pfp

Very different design than Hubs. If the corporate funding for Lens stops, network shuts down tomorrow. Apps integrated with Hubs work today if Warpcast goes down. Happened a week or so ago.

1 reply

0 recast

4 reactions

sean pfp

I wasn’t referring to Warpcast. Someone pays to host FC hubs. Unlike a blockchain, hubs doesn’t have a built in hosting compensation mechanism, so it will need to be externally managed when not subsidized They also don’t offer the composability of turing complete blockchains, which limits organic feature growth

3 replies

0 recast

0 reaction

Dan Romero pfp

There is no built in compensation mechanism for Ethereum nodes

1 reply

0 recast

0 reaction

sean pfp

2 replies

0 recast

0 reaction

Dan Romero pfp

Coinbase never got paid Ether for running a node. Alchemy doesn't get paid Ether for running a node.

1 reply

0 recast

0 reaction

sean pfp

In PoS, we're talking about rewards, and when Coinbase stakes their customer's ETH, they take a cut of the rewards. If you're referring to simply running a node to read / write to the network, they could have run a full node if they wanted, but didn't need to because they have other economic goals.

1 reply

0 recast

0 reaction

Dan Romero pfp

> they have other economic goals This is the reason people will run Hubs assuming we keep the cost reasonable. Have been in crypto for 10 years and this is definitely possible if you play it right. :)

2 replies

0 recast

0 reaction

timdaub pfp

I‘m not sure if this is a water-proof economic model. If WC said today that they‘d stop gossiping messages then probably they could do it because 99% of FC users are WC users. So this is a threat

2 replies

0 recast

0 reaction

timdaub pfp

@dwr.eth the beauty of the economic model of PoS and nakamoto consensus is that it is entirely detached from the message content and people are compensated for storage, that‘s why it‘s neutral

1 reply

0 recast

0 reaction

Dan Romero pfp

Right, but that's a different argument. One of the reasons having the FC protocol being developed by a core app on the protocol is we can follow the rules of the protocol even if there's not a more rigid enforcement mechanism. :)

1 reply

0 recast

0 reaction