Blockchain Product Case Study: Vitalik’s Perspective on Why Farcaster Considers On-Chain Account Data Sufficient for Decentralization
Vitalik responded to comments from the community regarding the decentralized social protocol Farcaster on Twitter today, stating that although Farcaster only puts user identities on the chain and stores most other data through off-chain methods, it is already sufficient to prevent witch attacks and centralized intervention. From this classic case, we can reflect on how blockchain technology should be integrated with products.
Background: Introduction to Farcaster
The community criticizes Farcaster for not being decentralized enough
Vitalik believes that putting accounts on the chain is sufficient for decentralization
Underlying issue: What demands require the use of blockchain?
Farcaster is a decentralized social protocol that provides users with a community protocol and frontend similar to Twitter, along with its innovative post interaction mode, Frame. It has recently attracted many users and is also a social software that Vitalik personally loves to use.
Recommended reading:
What is Vitalik’s favorite decentralized social protocol? Introduction to Farcaster product experience
Reason for recommendation: This article explains Farcaster’s interface elements and product design from a user perspective, and then examines its operating architecture and interaction mode with blockchain from a backend perspective. Reviewing this article first can help better understand the content of this article.
Community member Liron Shapira stated that although the Farcaster team claims to support blockchain technology, in reality, they only put the user registration part on the chain, which is just a meaningless repetition of what DNS and email addresses have done, except with worse parts.
Farcaster currently only copies Twitter’s functions and provides tools for below-average mini-games and market speculation gambling. 99% of the technology being built by Farcaster is unrelated to blockchain.
In particular, regarding data storage, Farcaster’s information is not stored using blockchain technology but is stored in a P2P network node called Hub, which is similar to the backend of many RSS readers that serve as “RSS centers”. This is why Liron believes that praising Farcaster as a blockchain use case is incorrect.
Recommended reading:
What is the Metaverse? How can Web3 accelerate the development of decentralized social protocols?
This article not only explains the concept of decentralized social protocols from the beginning but also clearly explains the key elements of decentralized community products such as username, data format, and data storage. It discusses the differences and trade-offs in implementation methods among different competitors, providing a more structured understanding of the issues raised by Liron.
However, Liron also stated that Farcaster is an interesting experiment that provides more functions for RSS, and he looks forward to observing whether it can bring new product traction and drive market growth.
Vitalik stated that he has already confirmed some information with the Farcaster team. He initially thought that Farcaster would store user post data in a large chain, similar to a simplified version of Filecoin, but later found out that this is not the case.
Farcaster stores data in Hubs, and each Hub stores the same data in the form of conflict-free replicated data types (CRDTs) and ensures the eventual consistency of information with the sender’s timestamp as the order. Vitalik stated that using this approach makes scaling and expansion easier.
The only “blockchain” Farcaster uses is Ethereum, and it constructs user account data, Farcaster ID, on the Optimism mainnet. Vitalik stated that the purpose of the blockchain is not only to “store” usernames but also:
– Reduce spam:
The design of gas fees is also important for reducing spam messages; otherwise, everyone will use it to back up their other data.
– Not controlled by centralized participants:
Blockchain nodes cannot delete, modify, or refuse access to user data at any time.
– Resistance to witch attacks:
Using blockchain to register usernames is the only good way to resist witch attacks. Technically, this can also be achieved using proof-of-work (PoW), but it is inefficient. Moreover, in practice, centralized participants have too many efficiency advantages over ordinary users on mobile phones or laptops.
Therefore, in order for Farcaster to become a powerful neutral network that does not rely on a single entity, putting user data on the chain can play the most critical role.
Recommended reading:
It’s not just blockchain! How does stateless infrastructure bring efficient decentralized networks?
This article discusses various technologies, including DAG and P2P networks, that can achieve Web3 concepts such as decentralization and free transfer of value, in addition to blockchain. These technologies are widely known as stateless infrastructure and should be used correctly according to product requirements.
In fact, both parties’ understanding is not wrong. The point of contention lies in their different imaginations of decentralized community software. Vitalik believes that putting user names on the chain already solves most of the problems, while Liron believes that only putting user names on the chain is meaningless and is just spending more effort on things that email and RSS have already done well. Liron also believes that the issues raised by Vitalik can be solved in other ways.
The above-mentioned controversy can be summarized as: When should blockchain be used? How should decentralized community software ideally integrate with blockchain? These are questions that need continuous exploration and contemplation.
Recommended reading:
What is global consensus? Which products or features are suitable for building on Ethereum?
Reason for recommendation: This article starts with “What requires strict global consensus” and discusses what product requirements are suitable for using blockchain technology, reflecting the point of contention in this case.
From a business and product perspective, the most important thing is whether these discussions hit the needs of users. Whether it is account data or post data, do users care if it is decentralized behind it? On the other hand, whether Farcaster can ultimately attract more users is determined not only by narrative highlights but also by many other factors that need to be fully considered.
CRDT
DID
Farcaster
PoP
RSS
Vitalik
Further reading:
Worldcoin’s first funding program Wave0 results: Cross-chain identity aggregation platform, decentralized Orb development
Introduction to Proof of Personhood (PoP): Difficulties in the development of digital identity until now
