Written by: Shaun, Yakihonne; Evan, Waterdrip Capital

The concept of decentralized social protocols (hereinafter referred to as Social Fi) is no longer new, but the products in this space are continuously undergoing real iterations.

At the beginning of the year, Kaito made "attention" quantifiable and tradable for the first time, incentivizing the acquisition of C-end users to serve Web3 project operations; recently, the popular application FOMO in the European and American crypto circles has allowed users to intuitively observe the correlation between smart money on-chain behavior and their social accounts through binding real transaction behaviors with social relationships, thus triggering strong resonance and creating a "FOMO" effect.

However, behind the continuous emergence of innovative gameplay at the application layer, the true determinants of the industry's upper limits still lie in three dimensions of decentralized social protocols at the underlying product structure: identity system, data storage, and search recommendation mechanism. In this context, this article will analyze the product structure of Social Fi, dissect the technological evolution and structural traps of decentralized social protocols, and predict the future development trends of Social Fi.

Technical Maturity: Three Core Dimensions of Decentralized Social Protocols

Whether it is the centralized social networks of Web2 or the decentralized social protocols of Web3, their underlying structures are built around three dimensions:

• Identity System (Account / ID)
• Data Storage (Storage)
• Search and Recommendation Mechanism (Search & Recommendation)

These three dimensions determine the degree of decentralization of a protocol and its long-term evolutionary direction. Currently, the industry has made significant breakthroughs in the identity system and data storage layers, but it is still in the early stages regarding search and recommendation mechanisms, which is also a key variable determining the future explosive potential of social protocols.

1. Identity System (Account / ID)

Different protocols adopt different technical paths for their identity systems:

• Nostr uses a cryptographic structure with local storage, not relying on any client or server, achieving a completely decentralized account system. Although the early experience was not user-friendly, it has been improved through methods like username binding.
• Farcaster employs on-chain DID (decentralized identity) while relying on specific hubs for data storage.
• The account system of Mastodon / ActivityPub depends on domain names, binding to specific servers; once a server goes down, the corresponding account also becomes invalid.

From these designs, it can be seen that the account systems of different protocols reflect varying degrees of decentralization in aspects such as "independence from client/server" and "support for cross-client login."

2. Data Storage (Storage)

Web2's data storage completely relies on centralized servers, while decentralized social protocols typically use distributed nodes or relay networks.

Farcaster achieves efficient storage through a limited number (about a hundred) of Data Hubs, distinguishing between on-chain and off-chain data.

Mastodon relies on independent servers; although open, it lacks data interoperability across servers.

Nostr allows anyone to deploy relays, enabling data to be synchronized across relays, and even if some relays go offline, content can still be discovered.

Key analytical indicators include: data storage location, discoverability after node downtime, and data tampering verification mechanisms.

Currently, Nostr effectively alleviates the loading and redundancy issues of distributed storage through an online/offline model, and YakiHonne is also the first client to launch an offline publishing model, allowing users to publish content and automatically sync even in weak network environments.

3. Search and Recommendation (Search & Recommendation)

Search and recommendation algorithms are the most challenging and critical issues.

Early Nostr had a poor search experience due to being entirely based on a public key system; however, it has now been optimized through username mapping.

Bluesky (AT Protocol) employs a partially centralized algorithm for recommendations to improve the experience.

Nostr is currently attempting to build a decentralized search and recommendation mechanism from the relay layer.

Thus, the algorithm layer remains the biggest challenge for decentralized social at this stage, but once resolved, it will mark the entire field entering a period of large-scale explosion.

Overall, current decentralized social protocols have resolved about 2.5 issues across the three core dimensions: the identity system is fully decentralized and gradually user-friendly; the distributed storage mechanism is mature and effectively addresses loading and search experiences; the recommendation algorithm is still in the exploratory stage and is the next key breakthrough point; for instance, Kaito's Yaps mechanism uses AI algorithms to quantify and reward users for posting high-quality crypto-related content on social platforms, measuring users' "attention" and influence in the crypto community rather than simple likes or exposure. From a technological evolution perspective, this will be the critical point determining whether decentralized social networks can achieve large-scale adoption.

Traps Encountered During the Emergence of Social Fi Application Products

Since the concept of Social Fi was born, a large number of products have emerged in the industry, including representative projects like Lens Protocol, Farcaster, and Friend Tech. However, most applications inevitably fall into some structural traps during their development, making it difficult to maintain user stickiness after initial enthusiasm wanes. This also explains why many Social Fi projects often appear briefly and cannot sustain long-term growth.

Function Replication Trap: Many Social Fi projects directly replicate Web2 social modules, such as short posts, long articles, videos, and communities. This does not create sufficient migration motivation and fails to form differentiated content value.

Lack of Niche Strong Users Trap: The success of early social protocols often depends on having a group of strong niche users. For example, Nostr, although a niche protocol, has a strong cultural drive from the Bitcoin community; the activity of just the Yaki client exceeds that of Farcaster's Warpcast. Therefore, Social Fi products lacking a cultural foundation or clear scenarios typically have short lifecycles.

Misuse of Token Incentives Trap: Many projects mistakenly believe that "token incentives" can replace product logic. For instance, some early popular Web3 social applications only produced short-term effects—due to a lack of a specific user ecosystem and sustained scenarios, they quickly disappeared. Similarly, when projects stack DID, Passport, various Web2 functions, and then add token issuance and payment modules, they appear "comprehensive" but actually fall into a complex and unsustainable trap. This is because any single module is a very deep vertical application.

Application Forms Will Continue to Be Restructured: We are currently in a transitional phase of "protocol maturity → application restructuring." Future social application forms cannot simply be extensions of Web2 but will generate entirely new interaction structures. Five years from now, the forms of applications will be completely different from now.

Once the core issues at the underlying protocol layer are thoroughly resolved, upper-layer applications will certainly emerge in new forms, rather than being simple extensions of existing social models.

Resource and Narrative Driven Trap: Social protocols have their specific strategic/political positions within the entire industry; whether the constructed social protocol has specific power support is also very important. Although Nostr and Bluesky have not issued tokens, they both have strong resources or factions backing them. Resources and narratives are often thresholds that Social Fi finds difficult to overcome.

Possible Future Directions: The Next Evolution of Social Fi

Most social tokens cannot form long-term value, primarily due to a lack of real transaction logic and user retention motivation. Compared to traditional Social Fi incentive models, two more promising future directions are:

1. Social Users Based on Payment Needs (Social Client as a Payment Gateway)

Social clients inherently possess identity binding, relationship chains, and message flow structures, making them very suitable as entry points for cross-border payments, small settlements, and content monetization.

2. Social Users Based on Transaction Needs (Social Client as a DeFi Gateway)

Social networks are inherently related to asset behavior. When social relationship chains integrate with on-chain asset flows, it may form a new generation of "social-driven on-chain financial behavior entry points." The explosion of Fomo (the linkage between social behavior and transaction behavior) is, in fact, an early manifestation of direction 2.

免责声明：本文章仅代表作者个人观点，不代表本平台的立场和观点。本文章仅供信息分享，不构成对任何人的任何投资建议。用户与作者之间的任何争议，与本平台无关。如网页中刊载的文章或图片涉及侵权，请提供相关的权利证明和身份证明发送邮件到support@aicoin.com，本平台相关工作人员将会进行核查。