Warpcast小测评:链上社交新体验,KOL的新阵地

Odaily星球日报Pubblicato 2024-02-06Pubblicato ultima volta 2024-02-06

Introduzione

一键完成Quest并领奖,你会点击吗?

原创|Odaily星球日报

作者|jk

Warpcast小测评:链上社交新体验,KOL的新阵地

在这个去中心化加速的时代,去中心化技术不仅正在重塑我们的金融体系,而且正在以前所未有的方式改变社交媒体的面貌。Warpcast,作为 Farcaster 去中心化社交协议的前端之一,正迅速成为加密社区的新宠。本文将深入探索 Warpcast 这款加密社交应用,分享使用的亲身体验,以及如何在这个去中心化的新社交世界中找到自己的位置。

如果需要注册的教程,可以参考这篇《Warpcast 最全指南:如何玩转这款「加密 Alpha 社交应用」?》。

币圈人的新世界:新的 Twitter?新的 KOL?

在这个 App 里面,社交媒体 KOL 的关注量和风格与“老平台”们完全不一样——V神在这个 app 里面只拥有 9 万左右的关注者,而在主页内可以看到的一个账号,@kaloh,目前拥有 42400 个关注者(而他本人在推特上的账号在 2 万关注者左右)。同样的“权重重配”也发生在其他几个账号上,@hww,@df,@jacopo.eth,从 Trending 的 cast 界面随机点进去的账号基本上粉丝都会比推特的对应账号粉丝数量多很多,有些甚至是十倍以上。

Warpcast小测评:链上社交新体验,KOL的新阵地

Warpcast小测评:链上社交新体验,KOL的新阵地

新 KOL 的不同平台粉丝数可能相差许多

也就是说,像 Friend.tech 一样,Warpcast 已经开始成功地产生出社区内自己的 KOL,他们并不依靠推特上的粉丝转移,或者是从某个已有的社交媒体上获取影响力,而是完全由社区产生出来的新意见领袖。

币圈外的世界:用户是否均为Web3原生用户?

很巧的是,这个对标传统社交媒体的应用里面涵盖了很多不属于币圈的标签;那么,通过这些标签的活跃度就可以看出来这个应用里面是币圈用户为主还是有其他用户的加入。

譬如在话题“古典音乐”标签下,发出的 cast 实际上数量比较少,仅有版主和几个活跃的人士在根据自身对于音乐的兴趣在分享一些音乐。而点进这些活跃人士的主页,会发现他们其实也是币圈生态中的一环,几乎所有人都带着“building xxx”(正在建设某某项目)的标签。可以看出,在这个时间点的使用者几乎是完全以币圈用户为主

Warpcast小测评:链上社交新体验,KOL的新阵地

发帖间隔 11 小时

Trending Frames:任务列表

点开首页右上角的 Trending Frames,里面会有各种各样的有趣的“操作”,也就是 Farcaster 新的 Frame 功能,允许用户在 Warpcast 的界面就可以使用开发者嵌入的 dApp,从而达到比 Twitter 功能更多、比传统Web3 Quest 花样更多的操作界面。让我们来看一个例子:

Warpcast小测评:链上社交新体验,KOL的新阵地

Show FID 的 Frame 功能

在这张图片里,用户可以一键点击图中的“Show FID”来检测自己的 FID。在这张图片里,内容创作者发布的文案是充满吸引力的:“你知道 FID<1 万的账户可能价值 1 个以太坊吗?检查一下你的 FID,这完全取决于你有多早(加入 Farcaster 生态)。”作为用户,理所当然会有点进去的理由;而这一点是传统的 Twitter 的平台很难做到的,因为 Twitter 缺少其他 App 原生植入的功能;而相对于传统的 Quest 而言,用户完全不需要点击那么多步来完成任务并获取奖励,一切都可以在 Warpcast 上完成,这无疑给用户提供了巨大的动力

那么自然而然的问题就是,这一功能是否会带来更多的恶意功能呢?用户可以一键做到某些操作,同样也可以一键授权某些敏感信息,在这种功能的方便快捷之下,是否会隐藏某些风险呢?假如,某个社交媒体的内容发布者用了以上图片里面相似的文案,但按键实际上引导你去授权某个恶意交易或者是某个完全不相干的 dApp,(例如一个可以生成随机数的应用)那么用户实际上也很难发觉,因为在按键上能够展示的字实在是太少了。

而根据官方的说法,“Frames 由 Farcaster 的 EdDSA 认证系统提供支持——这意味着不存在钱包被盗风险——并且由于它是经过加密签名的,它也无法被伪造。”至于这一功能的安全性到底如何,那就有待时间检验了。

总之,Warpcast 不仅是一个简单的社交媒体应用,它代表了一种全新的社交网络范式,将加密技术的潜力与日常交流无缝结合。通过参与到 Warpcast 的世界中,用户可以见证加密社区的活力和创新,还体会到去中心化带来的自由和可能性。随着越来越多的人开始探索和使用这样的平台,我们可以期待一个更加开放、透明和连接的数字世界。无论你是加密领域的老手,还是对去中心化社交感兴趣的新人,Warpcast 都值得一试。

Letture associate

GPT-5.6 Countdown: Abandon the Illusion of a Single API, Computational Iteration Can't Outpace a Single Page of Compliance

In mid-June, three seemingly independent industry events—the compliance-driven throttling of Fable 5, the open-sourcing of GLM-5.2, and the leaked release timeline for GPT-5.6—are pushing the global AI industry toward a watershed moment. These shifts signal a fundamental restructuring of the industry's underlying logic. First, **"usability" has substantially overtaken "advanced capabilities"** as the primary weight, pushing the global large language model (LLM) supply chain into a "dual-track" phase of controlled closed-source and local open-source coexistence. Second, **the competitive moats of closed-source giants are shifting**. Their technical focus is moving from "language intelligence" toward "spatial intelligence (world models)"—a domain heavily reliant on computing power. Third, faced with常态化 transnational compliance risks, **a "model-agnostic" decoupled design has become a survival necessity for application-layer developers to maintain business continuity.** The article details how Anthropic's Fable 5, despite its advanced engineering feats, was restricted for non-U.S. citizens within 72 hours of launch, highlighting how geopolitical compliance can instantly limit even the most advanced models. In response, the open-source camp, exemplified by Zhipu AI's MIT-licensed GLM-5.2, is gaining market share by offering stable performance improvements and significant cost advantages (up to 70% savings for enterprises), while achieving full adaptation with domestic semiconductor platforms. Meanwhile, closed-source leaders like OpenAI are pivoting. The anticipated GPT-5.6 reportedly shifts focus from language to spatial intelligence and world models, aiming to rebuild a generational gap in areas like 3D understanding, simulation, and industrial design that demand immense compute. The core conclusion is that the LLM supply chain's logic has changed. Enterprises must now evaluate infrastructure based on a composite of technical performance and policy compliance. For developers, complete reliance on a single closed-source API poses unacceptable risk. Implementing a truly model-agnostic architecture—enabling swift switches to compliant, locally deployable open-source alternatives—is no longer just good practice but a fundamental baseline for business continuity.

marsbit42 min fa

GPT-5.6 Countdown: Abandon the Illusion of a Single API, Computational Iteration Can't Outpace a Single Page of Compliance

marsbit42 min fa

Is the 'Token Subsidy War' Among AI Giants Almost Over?

The article discusses the ongoing "token subsidy war" among AI giants like OpenAI and Anthropic, questioning whether it's nearing its end. It reveals that current AI subscription prices are heavily subsidized, with some plans offering tokens at up to 70 times the actual cost to attract and retain heavy users, especially developers and enterprises. This strategy mirrors past internet-era subsidy battles, but with a key difference: AI tokens lack "lock-in" effects. Unlike ride-hailing or food delivery apps, users can easily switch between AI providers as APIs become standardized, making it difficult for companies to raise prices post-subsidy. The piece highlights a structural asymmetry in the competition. Giants like Google, with massive advertising revenue, can afford to subsidize tokens indefinitely, akin to using "tokens as a weapon." In contrast, venture-backed companies like OpenAI and Anthropic face pressure to become profitable, especially as they approach IPO. The article cites Google Ventures founder Bill Maris, who suggests Google could slash token prices by 80%, putting immense pressure on competitors. Two potential endgames are presented: the "internet service" model (subsidize, monopolize, then raise prices) and the "utility" model (tokens become a standardized, low-margin commodity like electricity). Given the low switching costs, the latter seems more likely. The competition may not have a single winner but could instead accelerate AI's evolution into a foundational, infrastructure-level technology, akin to a public utility. For now, users continue to benefit from heavily subsidized token costs.

marsbit59 min fa

Is the 'Token Subsidy War' Among AI Giants Almost Over?

marsbit59 min fa

Beyond the Stadium: The Profitable Games Surrounding the World Cup

"Beyond the Pitch: The Profit Game Around the World Cup" The FIFA World Cup transcends being a sporting spectacle, evolving into a massive global arena for speculation and profit-seeking. The 2026 tournament has amplified this dynamic, creating a multi-layered ecosystem of financial opportunism alongside the football. **Prediction markets** have surged into the mainstream. Platforms like Polymarket and Kalshi saw trading volumes for World Cup contracts soar, attracting new users with their financial trading model and high-profile, chain-based wealth stories that overshadow traditional sports betting in terms of growth and narrative. However, **traditional sportsbooks** remain the dominant force, leveraging established user habits, legal markets, and comprehensive product offerings to handle the vast majority of speculative wagers, with projections suggesting record-breaking betting volumes. Capital markets also react. **"Concept stocks"** in countries like South Korea and Japan experience volatile price swings based on team performance and anticipated fan spending on items like chicken, beer, and viewing parties, effectively becoming a stock market reflecting fan sentiment. The **ticket resale market** has become a sophisticated arena for arbitrage. Prices fluctuate wildly based on team draws and star power, with sellers sometimes listing tickets they don't yet own in a practice akin to short-selling, while FIFA's own "Right to Buy" tokens add another layer of speculative trading. **Collectibles and merchandise** offer another avenue. Panini sticker albums, with their inherent scarcity and nostalgic value, can become high-value collectibles. Limited-edition or locally themed jerseys command significant premiums on secondary markets, and even counterfeit vendors profit from fans' desire for affordable match-day identity. The **cryptocurrency** space has seen a frenzy of speculative, unauthorized World Cup-themed meme coins on chains like Solana. These tokens, often exploiting team names and player imagery, experience extreme pump-and-dump cycles, creating stories of massive gains for a few early entrants and steep losses for many others. Finally, an entire industry thrives on **providing information and tools** to other speculators. Developers create platforms like SeatSidekick to track ticket inventory and prices, while paid Telegram groups and subscriptions sell betting tips and predictions, monetizing the widespread desire for an informational edge. In essence, the World Cup has become a compressed, global laboratory for speculation. While the games determine champions on the field, a parallel, complex network of financial transactions—spanning prediction contracts, bets, stocks, tickets, collectibles, crypto, and information services—settles its own scores in the global market.

marsbit1 h fa

Beyond the Stadium: The Profitable Games Surrounding the World Cup

marsbit1 h fa

How Does Codex Use a Computer? Three Entry Points and Permission Boundaries

This article explains the three primary methods for Codex to interact with a computer, each with distinct use cases, permission boundaries, and trust levels. **1. Computer Use:** This offers the broadest access, allowing Codex to visually control and interact with the graphical user interface of authorized macOS/Windows apps, system settings, and even iOS simulators. It's ideal for tasks lacking APIs or structured tools, such as operating legacy software or multi-app workflows. However, it's the slowest method and has the widest permission scope, requiring careful supervision for sensitive actions. **2. Chrome Extension:** This grants Codex access to the user's logged-in Chrome browser state, including cookies, profiles, and open tabs. It's best for tasks requiring user identity across websites like Gmail, LinkedIn, Salesforce, or internal dashboards. Its key advantage is multi-tab control for complex workflows. While more powerful for browser-based tasks than Computer Use, it carries higher sensitivity as actions are performed under the user's identity. **3. In-App Browser:** This is a browser isolated within the Codex thread, separate from the user's personal browsing data. It excels in web development and debugging scenarios—previewing local servers, testing responsive layouts, or annotating designs directly on the page. Its isolation is a strength for development but a limitation for tasks requiring login sessions. The core principle is to choose the narrowest, safest, and most structured interface for the task. Use plugins or MCPs first, resort to visual control (Computer Use) only for GUI-dependent tasks, employ the Chrome extension for identity-reliant browser work, and prefer the In-App Browser for isolated development. **Appshots** are clarified as a fourth, complementary tool for *inputting* context—capturing a screenshot of a window to point Codex to something—rather than a method for Codex to *act*. Together, this layered approach highlights a key to AI agent productization: not granting unlimited permissions, but constraining them within clear boundaries for specific tasks while preserving user oversight.

marsbit3 h fa

How Does Codex Use a Computer? Three Entry Points and Permission Boundaries

marsbit3 h fa

Trading

Spot
Futures
活动图片