Comment by @definn • Hey
I totally agree on the tech hustle and lack of monetary incentives, I'm just not sure I agree on the network effect. If I understood correctly, the protoco
Comments
- The blog post talks about a cross-chain network, but that seems like more of an aspiration, and one far down the line. Lens Protocol barely has users; fragmenting them into multiple chains just doesn't make sense in the short term. Seems like it will add complexity to building, confusion to users, and inconsistency with features. "Lens Protocol", as we know it today, will run on Lens Network.
We don't currently have assurances that existing posts will even move with it. The way I'm seeing it talked about is more like *Lens Network will support Polygon data for as long as users want*, not a clear commitment to a long-term cross-chain solution.
Most importantly: do you believe that (old) Lens collectibles on Polygon will be seen as equal to those deployed natively on Lens Network, by the Lens community? I'm not so sure, which kind of kills collectibles until it launches. Look at the price of $BONSAI since the announcement.
Users are going to be really confused when they create an NFT on Lens Protocol, but can't list it on OpenSea because it's on Lens Protocol on Lens Network. Meanwhile they could have if they had switched their wallet to Polygon. That's a mess, IMO.
\> On the monetary incentives, dapps can capture fees but Open Actions don't, right? There should be grants for Open Actions dev
Fees can be built into Open Actions, but generally it's not done because you're essentially asking apps to roll their own solution, rather than build on yours. Apps get a percentage of the collect fees, but the developers of the actions don't. It should be noted, however, that Lens has been very generous with grants and I have received grants for basically all of the work I've done on Lens.