#钱包社交转型 Farcaster five years, $180 million, $1 billion valuation - ultimately, it surrendered. The shift from the dream of "Decentralization Twitter" to completely turning to Wallet reflects a painful logic: MAU dropped from 80,000 to 20,000, and users can never escape the small circle of encryption. The content is highly self-circulating and has no appeal to ordinary users.

One creator's comparative data left the deepest impression on me: talking to insiders for four years is not as effective as talking to the public for four days; the viewership of a year's encryption content can be shattered by four days of exposure to a broader audience. This is not a problem of Farcaster; it is the structural terminal illness of social networking itself—the moat of network effects is there, and the monopolistic power of X cannot be shaken.

Turning to wallets instead validates real demand. Wallets are benchmarked against on-chain behaviors—transfers, transactions, interactions—which are rigid needs rather than expressions of desire. From growth rates, usage frequency to retention, the data speaks a fact: tool-based functions naturally form stickiness more easily than social ones.

From the perspective of copy trading, this turning point is actually quite enlightening. When we choose to follow traders, we often make similar mistakes – being attracted by a trader's "story" and "persona", and in the end, neglecting where their truly stable source of income comes from. Sometimes we need to return from "ideal" to "cash flow". Wallet strategies are indeed more realistic, but the discomfort of those long-time users in the community also illustrates a principle: just because the direction is right doesn't mean the process is good. Some things, once lost, cannot be regained.