A hybrid Web2 to Web3 transition emphasizing content creation, sharing, and contributions as Web2 with Web3 ownership of privacy, data, and UGC in a social workflow network. Where blockchain is used for documentation and authentication that the consumer benefits from without realizing its Web3. They get a taste of Web3. But with Web2 revenue modeling and dynamic interface engagements. Even dynamic tokenization of chain. It's the model. Farcaster and Lensprotocol are the cart before the horse. Farcaster is now looking for Web2 use cases. A massive dose of Web2 use cases with really cool Web3 tools. Dynamic tokens. No native currency. Total Web3 social network models are currently stalled. It's the network model, 40-50 M MAUs with Web2 is the path to Web3.
You share a selfie with a new Uniqlo sweater you just bought, sharing a link to the product page, which generates a preview card and a 10% off coupon for the same garment. You go ahead and buy with one-click purchasing: the influencer gets a kickback, the publisher gets a bounty, and you get a deal on a sweater. It all happens seamlessly.
It could, but there would need to be up front coordination between the influencer, the social network she's posting the pic of the sweater the the Uniqlo link on, and the Uniqlo digital storefront. Otherwise, as soon as a user clicks the link in the Uniqlo site embedded in the frame on an X/Twitter feed, the identity of the user and the referrer is lost - unless you make use of the web2.0 way of tracking this, using HTTP payloads like cookies, headers, and query strings. This has to be defined and agreed upon up front between all three parties - or, they all have to support the same vendors that sit in the middle of these transactions and take a slice of the revenue--essentially a rent seeking business, which is what web3.0 strives to eliminate. A Farcaster frame, from what I can tell, is just Farcaster's version of embedding content into a Farcaster feed using OpenGraph tags. The difference is that if the web servers serving up that embedded content are storing state on the blockchain, then both the embedded app and the outer app have access to the same data. So Uniqlo, for example, could mint their 10% offer as an NFT when the frame is loaded, and that NFT would be linked to the wallet ID of the person looking at the Farcaster feed with the embedded frame. If that person clicks "buy", then Uniqlo will know exactly how that customer came to them in the first place. The issue I see with this is that Uniqlo and other vendors would still need to build web 3.0 capable backends that talk to blockchains. The launch of Farcaster Frames changes nothing about this, but what it does do is allow companies like Uniqlo to reach consumers on web3.0 networks like Farcaster more easily, and this may incentivize them to make the investments in storing state on blockchains.
A hybrid Web2 to Web3 transition emphasizing content creation, sharing, and contributions as Web2 with Web3 ownership of privacy, data, and UGC in a social workflow network. Where blockchain is used for documentation and authentication that the consumer benefits from without realizing its Web3. They get a taste of Web3. But with Web2 revenue modeling and dynamic interface engagements. Even dynamic tokenization of chain. It's the model. Farcaster and Lensprotocol are the cart before the horse. Farcaster is now looking for Web2 use cases. A massive dose of Web2 use cases with really cool Web3 tools. Dynamic tokens. No native currency. Total Web3 social network models are currently stalled. It's the network model, 40-50 M MAUs with Web2 is the path to Web3.
Why can't this happen with FB or X?
You share a selfie with a new Uniqlo sweater you just bought, sharing a link to the product page, which generates a preview card and a 10% off coupon for the same garment. You go ahead and buy with one-click purchasing: the influencer gets a kickback, the publisher gets a bounty, and you get a deal on a sweater. It all happens seamlessly.
It could, but there would need to be up front coordination between the influencer, the social network she's posting the pic of the sweater the the Uniqlo link on, and the Uniqlo digital storefront. Otherwise, as soon as a user clicks the link in the Uniqlo site embedded in the frame on an X/Twitter feed, the identity of the user and the referrer is lost - unless you make use of the web2.0 way of tracking this, using HTTP payloads like cookies, headers, and query strings. This has to be defined and agreed upon up front between all three parties - or, they all have to support the same vendors that sit in the middle of these transactions and take a slice of the revenue--essentially a rent seeking business, which is what web3.0 strives to eliminate. A Farcaster frame, from what I can tell, is just Farcaster's version of embedding content into a Farcaster feed using OpenGraph tags. The difference is that if the web servers serving up that embedded content are storing state on the blockchain, then both the embedded app and the outer app have access to the same data. So Uniqlo, for example, could mint their 10% offer as an NFT when the frame is loaded, and that NFT would be linked to the wallet ID of the person looking at the Farcaster feed with the embedded frame. If that person clicks "buy", then Uniqlo will know exactly how that customer came to them in the first place. The issue I see with this is that Uniqlo and other vendors would still need to build web 3.0 capable backends that talk to blockchains. The launch of Farcaster Frames changes nothing about this, but what it does do is allow companies like Uniqlo to reach consumers on web3.0 networks like Farcaster more easily, and this may incentivize them to make the investments in storing state on blockchains.
You broke down the importance of Frames to where I better understand the implications and the ripple effects I'm seeing with their use.
Perhaps the first time I've felt bullish on a blockchain feature that isn't pure speculation. Props, your writing transcends the chaos of Facebook.
Thanks.