Farcaster, a crypto-based decentralised social networking protocol hit the news this week, by raising an eye watering 150 million USD, with a valuation of 1 billion USD, all the while sporting around 80K daily active users. For context, Bluesky has around 300k daily active users. The news raises a few questions: What exactly is Farcaster, […]

I take a deep dive into crypto-based social network Farcaster, aka Torment-Nexus-on-the-blockchain.

I think that crypto/web3 is mostly really dumb and bad, but I also do think that what happens on other decentralised social networks is relevant to understand the fediverse. The different protocols influence each other and I dont think they should be understood in isolation. That is why I wanted to have a better understanding of what Farcaster is, and why a16z wanted to spend so much money on it.

  • AtHeartEngineer@lemmy.worldEnglish
    41·
    6 months ago

    Those are different design choices that have different trade offs, I didn’t make these decisions, I’m just explaining how it is

    • knightly the Sneptaur
      21·
      6 months ago

      No worries, I’m merely confident that the tradeoffs necessary to employ a blockchain aren’t worth the supposed benefits thereof.

      • AtHeartEngineer@lemmy.worldEnglish
        32·
        6 months ago

        I understand, don’t get me wrong, 99% of stuff in crypto is hot garbage, but having a global database that isn’t controlled by any one (or even dozen) entities is pretty powerful. The 2 guys that started farcaster could quit, or get hit by a bus, or decide it’s not profitable enough and pivot, but at least you have control over your profile still. If reddit was decentralized more, they wouldn’t be able to shut down their APIs for 3rd party clients.

        Trust me I understand the criticism of block chains, but if we want open source and the internet to thrive and not be controlled by companies, we need a global layer that is neutral.

        • knightly the Sneptaur
          31·
          6 months ago

          We already have that, it’s called a Distributed Hash Table, no blockchain required.

          • AtHeartEngineer@lemmy.worldEnglish
            21·
            6 months ago

            But there’s no global consensus, it’s not trustless, and smart contracts unlock a lot of additional composable capabilities.

            • knightly the Sneptaur
              31·
              6 months ago

              Trust, consensus, and access control are session-layer issues that don’t need to be solved by a transport-layer protocol. Social networks deserve to be able to forget things.

              • AtHeartEngineer@lemmy.worldEnglish
                11·
                6 months ago

                Which is a whole lot of extra engineering that is already taken care of with a blockchain. Whether social networks should forget your username/registration is a different debate.

                • knightly the Sneptaur
                  1·
                  6 months ago

                  It really isn’t a different debate when you’re talking about putting them on the blockchain, and all that other engineering has already been done by other distributed social networks.

                  • AtHeartEngineer@lemmy.worldEnglish
                    1·
                    6 months ago

                    Ok, we are talking in circles, you have your opinions, I have mine. If you want to talk about this over voice at any point, let me know, I don’t think text is going to get anywhere, and Lemmy has a pretty strong bias against crypto (which I understand, but obviously disagree with)