The feed is broken. Centralized platforms like Twitter and Facebook optimize for engagement, not user sovereignty, creating filter bubbles and censorship risks.
web3-social-decentralizing-the-feed
Blog
The Future of the Feed Is a Subnet of Your Choosing
The monolithic social feed is dead. The future is a fragmented landscape of sovereign, community-managed algorithmic subnets on networks like Avalanche and Polygon Supernets, where users choose their content universe.
introduction
THE CONTEXT
Introduction
Social media's monolithic architecture is collapsing under the weight of centralized moderation and algorithmic control, creating a vacuum for decentralized alternatives.
Decentralized social protocols like Farcaster and Lens Protocol separate the social graph from the application layer, but they still rely on singular, monolithic data layers.
The future is modular. The next evolution is a subnet-based social stack, where users choose their own data availability, consensus, and execution environments, mirroring the modular blockchain thesis.
Evidence: Farcaster's Frames protocol demonstrates demand for composable social apps, but its reliance on a single Hub reveals the scaling bottleneck a subnet architecture solves.
thesis-statement
THE ARCHITECTURE
Thesis Statement
The future of social feeds is a user-owned subnet, not a monolithic platform, where content discovery is a composable protocol.
Social feeds are infrastructure. They are not applications but a utility for routing attention, currently monopolized by centralized algorithms that optimize for engagement, not user value.
The feed becomes a subnet. Users will deploy personal, permissioned subnets on networks like Avalanche or EigenLayer AVS to host their curated content graph, controlling data and monetization.
Discovery is a composable protocol. Aggregators like Farcaster Frames or Lens Open Actions will query these subnets, creating a competitive market for ranking algorithms separate from data storage.
Evidence: Farcaster's on-chain social graph and Warpcast clients demonstrate that separating the protocol from the client enables diverse, user-aligned feed experiences.
key-trends
THE FUTURE OF THE FEED IS A SUBNET OF YOUR CHOOSING
Key Trends: The Fragmentation of Social
Monolithic social platforms are collapsing under their own weight, giving way to a composable ecosystem of specialized, sovereign networks.
01
The Problem: The Algorithmic Overlord
Centralized feeds optimize for engagement, not user value, creating echo chambers and data silos.\n- Ad-driven models prioritize time-on-site over truth or community health.\n- Users have zero sovereignty over their data, graph, or content moderation rules.
-80%
User Control
1
Algorithm to Rule All
02
The Solution: Farcaster Frames & On-Chain Social Graphs
Decouple the social graph from the client, enabling permissionless innovation on a shared data layer.\n- Frames turn any cast into an interactive app (e.g., mint, vote, trade) without leaving the feed.\n- The graph is a public utility, allowing new clients like Karma, Yup, and Supercast to compete on UX, not network effects.
10k+
Frames Deployed
~$0
Platform Lock-in
03
The Problem: One-Size-Fits-All Moderation
Platforms enforce global content policies that satisfy no one, leading to censorship or toxicity.\n- Political speech is either over-policed or under-moderated.\n- Niche communities (e.g., trading, art) cannot tailor rules to their specific needs and trust models.
0
Custom Rulesets
100%
Top-Down Control
04
The Solution: Lens Protocol & Sovereign Namespaces
Moderation becomes a configurable middleware layer, not a platform mandate.\n- Creators and communities can deploy their own content modules with custom rules (e.g., token-gated, staked moderation).\n- Interoperable profiles via Lens handles allow users to port reputation across different social 'subnets'.
100+
Mod Modules
Portable
Social Identity
05
The Problem: Captured Economic Value
Platforms extract ~100% of the economic surplus from creator-audience relationships.\n- Tip jars and subscriptions are platform-controlled with high fees.\n- Viral content generates ad revenue for the corporation, not the community that created it.
30-50%
Platform Cut
$0
Community Ownership
06
The Solution: Friend.tech & Social DeFi Primitives
Social interactions are financialized into tradable assets, aligning incentives.\n- Keys/ Shares turn community access into a liquid asset, allowing creators to monetize influence directly.\n- Protocols like Stars Arena and friend.tech demonstrate >$100M TVL in social capital markets, proving demand for ownership.
$100M+
Social TVL
Creator-Owned
Cash Flow
THE FUTURE OF THE FEED IS A SUBNET OF YOUR CHOOSING
Subnet Architectures: A Technical Comparison
A first-principles breakdown of execution environment trade-offs for building sovereign, application-specific blockchains.
| Feature / Metric | Avalanche Subnets | Polygon Supernets | Arbitrum Orbit | OP Stack (Custom Chain) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Sovereignty Level | High (Custom VM, Token, Validators) | High (Custom VM, Token, Validators) | Medium (Custom Token, Inherits L1 Security) | Medium (Custom Token, Inherits L1 Security) |
Time to Finality | < 2 sec | ~ 2-4 sec | ~ 1-3 sec | ~ 2-5 sec |
Data Availability (DA) Layer | Avalanche Primary Network | Polygon PoS / Celestia / Avail | Ethereum (Arbitrum One) / Any DA via BOLD | Ethereum / Celestia / Avail |
Native Bridge to L1 | ||||
Cross-Subnet Messaging | Native (Avalanche Warp Messaging) | Via L1 (Ethereum) or Third-Party | Via L1 (Ethereum) or LayerZero | Via L1 (Ethereum) or LayerZero |
Sequencer Decentralization | Validator Set | Single / Permissioned | Permissioned (Planned Decentralization) | Permissioned (Planned Decentralization) |
Gas Token Flexibility | Any (Custom Token) | Any (Custom Token) | Any (Custom Token) | ETH or Custom Token |
Primary Use Case | High-TPS dApps, Gaming, Enterprise | Enterprise, Gaming, Scalable dApps | General-Purpose dApps, DeFi | General-Purpose dApps, DeFi |
deep-dive
THE EXECUTION LAYER
Deep Dive: The Mechanics of an Algorithmic Subnet
Algorithmic subnets are sovereign, application-specific blockchains that autonomously manage their own consensus, data availability, and execution based on pre-defined rules.
Algorithmic Subnets Are Sovereign: An algorithmic subnet is not a sidechain or a rollup. It is a separate blockchain with its own validator set and consensus mechanism, like Avalanche Subnets or Cosmos Appchains. This sovereignty allows for custom execution environments and fee tokens, decoupling performance from the parent chain's congestion.
The Algorithm Is the Governor: The 'algorithmic' component refers to the pre-programmed logic that dictates network parameters. This logic automatically adjusts validator incentives, slashing conditions, and data availability strategies based on on-chain metrics, removing human governance bottlenecks seen in systems like Polygon Supernets.
Data Availability Is the Constraint: The subnet's throughput and security are bounded by its chosen data availability (DA) layer. Opting for a high-throughput DA solution like Celestia or EigenDA versus Ethereum calldata creates a fundamental trade-off between cost and security guarantees for the subnet's state.
Evidence: Avalanche's DeFi Kingdoms subnet processes transactions for under $0.01, a cost structure impossible on Ethereum L1, by leveraging its own validators and a custom fee token. This demonstrates the performance isolation algorithmic architecture provides.
protocol-spotlight
THE FUTURE OF THE FEED IS A SUBNET OF YOUR CHOOSING
Protocol Spotlight: Early Builders
The monolithic social feed is dead. The next wave is sovereign, high-throughput subnets purpose-built for specific content and community logic.
01
Farcaster Frames: The On-Chain App Store
The Problem: Social feeds are siloed engagement traps. The Solution: Turn any cast into an interactive, on-chain application endpoint.
- Enables native transactions, minting, voting without leaving the client
- ~2M+ frames created, demonstrating instant product-market fit
- Transforms social clients like Warpcast into a new OS layer
2M+
Frames Created
<2s
Tx Latency
02
Lens Protocol: The Social Graph Subnet
The Problem: Social data is locked in corporate databases. The Solution: A dedicated Arbitrum Nova subnet for portable social identity and content.
- ~400k+ profiles with composable follow, collect, and mirror mechanics
- ~$0.001 per post transaction costs enable spam-resistant scaling
- Serves as the canonical data layer for hundreds of client applications
400k+
Profiles
$0.001
Cost/Post
03
DeSo: The High-Throughput Content Chain
The Problem: Storing rich media on-chain is prohibitively expensive. The Solution: A Bitcoin-inspired L1 optimized for social data at scale.
- Custom storage-heavy blockchain handling profiles, posts, and videos
- ~10k TPS capacity, orders of magnitude above general-purpose L1s
- Native monetization via creator coins and social tokens
10k TPS
Capacity
2B+
Block Height
04
The Subnet Mandate: Specialization Beats Generalization
The Problem: One chain cannot optimize for everything. The Solution: Sovereign execution environments (subnets/appchains) for specific social primitives.
- Avalanche, Polygon Supernets, Arbitrum Orbit provide the substrate
- Enables custom fee markets, governance, and VM for community rules
- Isolates social traffic from DeFi congestion and cost volatility
-99%
Cost vs L1
~1s
Finality
05
Cross-Chain Social: The Interoperability Layer
The Problem: Subnets create new siloes. The Solution: CCIP, LayerZero, Wormhole as the messaging backbone for a unified social experience.
- Enables profile portability and cross-subnet notification systems
- Intent-based bridging (like Across) can abstract asset movement for social actions
- Critical for aggregating the fragmented social subnet landscape
20+
Chains Supported
<5min
State Sync
06
Monetization: Beyond Ads and Subscriptions
The Problem: Platform capture destroys creator economics. The Solution: Native, programmable value flows built into the social primitive.
- Superfluid streams for continuous revenue sharing
- ERC-6551 Token Bound Accounts turning profiles into asset vaults
- Direct on-chain tipping integrated into the client UX
100%
Creator Take
24/7
Revenue Streams
counter-argument
THE FRAGMENTATION TRAP
Counter-Argument: The Liquidity Problem
Application-specific subnets risk creating isolated liquidity pools that undermine DeFi's core value proposition.
Application-specific subnets fragment liquidity. A dedicated subnet for a DEX or lending protocol creates a captive, non-composable asset pool. This defeats the composability flywheel that drives capital efficiency on general-purpose L2s like Arbitrum and Optimism.
Cross-subnet communication imposes latency and cost. Atomic composability between a lending subnet and a DEX subnet requires a trust-minimized bridge like Hyperlane or LayerZero. Each cross-chain message adds seconds of latency and bridging fees, breaking the seamless user experience.
The solution is shared liquidity layers. Protocols like Uniswap V4 hooks or EigenLayer AVS restaking demonstrate that specialized execution can coexist with shared settlement and liquidity. The future is modular, not isolated.
Evidence: The Total Value Locked (TVL) on Avalanche subnets is a fraction of its C-Chain, demonstrating the liquidity gravity of a primary execution layer. Isolated chains struggle to bootstrap network effects.
risk-analysis
THE SUBNET FRAGMENTATION TRAP
Risk Analysis: What Could Go Wrong?
Decentralizing the feed into sovereign subnets introduces new systemic risks that must be modeled before adoption.
01
The Liquidity Silos Problem
Sovereign execution environments fragment liquidity, creating isolated pools that are shallow and inefficient. This defeats the core composability promise of DeFi.
- Capital inefficiency from duplicated TVL across similar subnet AMMs.
- Arbitrage latency between subnets creates persistent price discrepancies, a tax on users.
- Protocols like Uniswap and Aave would need to deploy and bootstrap liquidity on dozens of chains, a massive operational burden.
-70%
Pool Depth
2-5s
Arb Window
02
The Security Subsidy Vanishes
A subnet's security is only as strong as its validator set and economic stake. Moving off a large, battle-tested L1 like Ethereum removes its cryptographic security guarantee.
- Weaker consensus (e.g., a small PoA or PoS set) is cheaper to attack than Ethereum's ~$50B+ staked.
- Bridge risk becomes systemic; assets are only as secure as the weakest bridge (e.g., LayerZero, Across) connecting back to L1.
- Replay attacks and chain halts are now the subnet operator's problem, not the L1's.
~$50B
Security Delta
1-of-N
Weakest Link
03
The Developer Tooling Abyss
Every new subnet is a new runtime, requiring bespoke indexers, oracles, and wallets. The ecosystem tooling that makes Ethereum development efficient does not auto-port.
- Indexing services like The Graph need custom subgraphs for each subnet, increasing costs and latency.
- Oracle networks (Chainlink) require separate node deployments and liquidity provisioning for price feeds.
- User experience shatters as wallets like MetaMask struggle to manage dozens of isolated RPC endpoints and state.
3-6mo
Tooling Lag
10x
DevOps Cost
04
The Inter-Subnet MEV Jungle
Cross-subnet transactions via bridges or shared sequencers create a new, opaque layer for Maximal Extractable Value. This MEV is harder to democratize than on a single chain.
- Cross-domain arbitrage becomes a specialized game dominated by sophisticated players with proprietary infrastructure.
- Intent-based solvers (like those in CowSwap or UniswapX) face higher complexity and latency, reducing their effectiveness and user savings.
- Proposer-Builder Separation (PBS) frameworks from Ethereum do not translate, leading to centralized sequencer cartels.
+300ms
Solver Latency
Opaque
MEV Market
future-outlook
THE DATA SUBSTRATE
Future Outlook: The 24-Month Horizon
The future of oracles is a competitive market of specialized data subnets, not a single monolithic network.
Specialized data subnets win. Generic oracles like Chainlink will face competition from purpose-built networks for DeFi, RWA, and gaming. This mirrors the L2/L3 evolution, where Celestia and EigenDA provide data availability for application-specific chains.
The feed becomes a commodity. Standardized data formats and aggregation protocols will make price data a low-margin utility. The value shifts to verifiable compute and custom data streams for derivatives or on-chain AI.
Evidence: Pyth Network's pull-based model already demonstrates the efficiency of specialized data providers. In 24 months, we will see dedicated subnets for options volatility surfaces and real-world asset attestations.
takeaways
THE FUTURE OF THE FEED
Key Takeaways
The monolithic social feed is a legacy relic. The future is a competitive market of specialized, sovereign subnetworks.
01
The Problem: The Monolithic Feed
Centralized algorithms prioritize engagement over truth, creating a single point of censorship and failure. Data silos prevent user ownership and cross-platform composability.
- Ad-Driven Model: Incentives misaligned with user value.
- One-Size-Fits-All: No specialization for niche communities (e.g., devs, traders, artists).
- ~70% of users report algorithmic fatigue according to Pew Research.
1
Algorithm
0
User Sovereignty
02
The Solution: Sovereign Social Subnets
Specialized blockchains (subnets) host individual communities and apps, each with its own rules, tokens, and data layer. Think Farcaster Frames on a dedicated chain, or a DeFi-alpha feed with on-chain reputation.
- Custom Consensus: Optimize for speed (~500ms latency) or storage as needed.
- Data Ownership: User graphs and content are portable assets.
- Monetization: Direct creator fees, subscription NFTs, and community tokens replace ads.
Modular
By Design
100%
Fee Capture
03
The Mechanism: Intent-Centric Aggregation
Users won't browse 50 subnets. Aggregator clients (like UniswapX for swaps) will use intent-based protocols to source content across subnetworks based on user preference.
- Cross-Subnet Queries: A single query pulls from gaming, art, and finance subnets simultaneously.
- Reputation Bridges: On-chain credibility from Lens Protocol or Farcaster becomes a cross-subnet primitive.
- The Feed as a Portfolio: You curate your informational exposure across sovereign data markets.
Intent-Based
Aggregation
0
Walled Gardens
04
The Business Model: Attention Derivatives
Subnets monetize not through ads, but by facilitating and taxing high-value attention markets. This mirrors the shift from TVL to fee revenue in DeFi.
- Attention Staking: Users stake tokens to signal content quality; earn rewards for curation.
- Ad-Space AMMs: Ad slots are dynamically priced via bonding curves on subnet AMMs like Uniswap V4.
- Revenue Splits: ~80/20 split to creators/network, enforced by smart contracts.
>Ads
Model
On-Chain
Settlement
05
The Hurdle: Interoperability Fragmentation
A subnet for every community creates a nightmare of liquidity and data fragmentation. Without robust cross-subnet communication, the vision fails.
- Bridging Latency: Moving social capital between chains can't take minutes. Needs LayerZero-like fast finality.
- State Synchronization: A user's reputation must update near-instantly across all subscribed subnets.
- The Winner: Will be the interoperability stack that solves this for social graphs, not just tokens.
#1
Challenge
~0s
Target Sync
06
The First Mover: Farcaster's Strategic Edge
Farcaster's on-chain social graph and Frames primitive position it as the natural hub to bootstrap subnet ecosystems. It's the Ethereum to coming social L2s.
- Existing Graph: ~400k+ registered users provides immediate bootstrap liquidity.
- Frames as Portals: Any Frame is a gateway to a dedicated application subnet.
- The Playbook: Replicate the Arbitrum/OP Stack growth model, but for social apps.
Hub & Spoke
Architecture
400k+
Bootstrap Users
ENQUIRY
Get In Touch
today.
Our experts will offer a free quote and a 30min call to discuss your project.
NDA Protected
Confidentiality24h Response
Time to ValueDirectly to Engineering Team
No Sales Fluff10+
Protocols Shipped
$20M+
TVL Overall