Content
@
https://warpcast.com/~/channel/nearchos
0 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
Trigs
@trigs
This conversation took a really really long time to get to the point: Sufficient is subjective. These tradeoffs on "edge cases" is what defines a protocol, however. I'm actually fine with accepting that Farcaster is somewhat centralized for now, with the knowledge that it has to further decentralize later and there needs to be at least a vague plan, if not an iron clad one. But what always puts my hackles up is each time this discussion pops up about the points of centralization it becomes this really sensitive subject with lots of defensive misdirection about practically. Why not just boldly embrace the centralization tradeoffs and trust that if the reasoning is good enough for the team, why wouldn't it be for the community? That kind of transparency goes a long way towards bridging the gap between "sufficient" and "trustless". https://warpcast.com/dwr.eth/0x359c8c23
2 replies
1 recast
7 reactions
Trigs
@trigs
Keep in mind, as I'm saying this I'm also recognizing that these issues don't have right answers, so I mean kudos to Dan that he's trying. I'm not at all trying to be negative. Just curious and open to examining these topics of extreme importance.
0 reply
1 recast
0 reaction
Adam
@adam-
Hypothetically speaking, if Merkle were to be acquired by Coinbase, would you see that as a pro or a con in regards to decentralization being a goal they follow through on? For the record, I think both centralized and decentralized have their own issues and just by being decentralized doesn't solve all the problems of running a network, but an outcome I'm not looking forward to is if this quasi decentralized status actually turns out to just be put on in the end.
1 reply
0 recast
1 reaction
