Chainfeeds Introduction:
The decentralized social protocol Farcaster has completed a $150 million financing with a valuation of $1 billion, led by Paradigm. Crypto researcher Haotian analyzed Farcaster's growth potential from the perspectives of Farcaster's technical principles and the differences between it and other decentralized social protocols such as Nostr/Lens.
Article Source:
https://x.com/tmel0211/status/1793517877993288009
Article author:
Haotian
View:
Haotian: Is it expensive to raise $150 million in a round A with a valuation of $1 billion? I don't think it's expensive. Because Farcaster is not just a protocol limited to the Web3 field, it has the potential to rush to Web2 to solve the privacy protection and data ownership of social platforms, especially the problem of the proliferation of advertising information. From the perspective of the Web2 valuation system, it is not expensive at all. Most of those projects with high FDV but bleak reality are due to the huge contrast between established expectations and realized value. In my opinion, the expected value currently shown by Farcaster can support a VC valuation of 1B. What is the difference between Farcaster and social protocols such as Nostr and Lens? Through observation and analysis, I personally believe that Farcaster is easier to implement and can capture a wider range of market value. Nostr is a minimalist P2P messaging system, which is more inclined to the design of the upstream communication architecture layer. It lacks a strong application market drive and is still in the conceptual stage. Lens emphasizes the ownership and interoperability of user data, but relies too much on the incentive expectations of Tokenomics, which leads to the slow development of its application ecosystem. The Farcaster protocol mixes the on-chain and off-chain environments, and has better social Alpha platform fundamentals. Whether it is the experience reputation of early users or the emergence of community assets such as $DEGEN, it gives people a "full of value" growth expectation. Farcaster's overall technical architecture framework is not complicated. It draws on the strengths of many others. It not only adopts the essence of Nostr's back-end communication decentralized architecture, but also adopts the Warps points system to avoid the problem of sustainable growth of pure Token incentives. In particular, Frames' front-end interactive experience innovation similar to mini-programs is particularly in line with the preferences of Web3 user groups, and the payment end is naturally connected to the Web3 wallet environment, making it easier to onboard high-quality user groups with payment habits. I think Farcaster should not be classified as SocialFI, DeSoc might be more appropriate.
Content Sources 
