From Fragmented Components to Super Layers

Written by: JayLovesPotato

Translated by: Block unicorn

In the past few days, a series of protocol announcements—and Vitalik’s comments—have reignited discussions in the decentralized social space. While these events may seem isolated, collectively they clearly indicate that platformization of protocols is now advancing in a “strategic” manner.

1. News and the Strategic Background Behind It

Last Wednesday, Dan Romero, co-founder of the decentralized social platform Farcaster, announced that Neynar, one of the earliest and most influential clients for Farcaster, will acquire Farcaster. As part of this transition, ownership of protocol contracts, core codebases, official applications, and even Clanker will be transferred in phases. Meanwhile, Romero pointed out that the founding team will step back from daily operations to focus on new projects.

The decision by Farcaster appears to reflect an internal consensus: the long-term sustainability of social protocols depends less on continuous iteration at the protocol design level and more on the increasingly specialized infrastructure and operational capabilities at the current stage.

In fact, this means control naturally shifts into the hands of infrastructure providers that have successfully aggregated developer resources and traffic—Neynar has been emphasizing the costs and complexities of running Farcaster’s central servers since 2024, abstracting these challenges into APIs and infrastructure layers so developers can focus on product development rather than delving into protocol internals.

In contrast, Lens has adopted a more advanced—though conceptually aligned—approach. With a relatively richer set of tools, resources, and a mature user base, Lens has chosen to further push along the operational path.

On January 20, 2026, Lens Labs officially announced that Mask Network will assume the role of “manager” for the next phase of Lens, shifting the project’s focus from infrastructure building to consumer-facing products. Mask stated that this move aims to transform the protocol’s verified achievements into experiences accessible to the mass market.

It’s worth noting that both Lens and Aave emphasized that this transition does not involve changes to ownership, financial structure, or governance. The focus is not on the acquisition itself but on a clear reallocation of responsibilities—specifically, who will be responsible for turning the protocol into a product that people will use daily.

2. The Key to Platformization Lies in Clear Role Division

From a broader perspective, these two cases point to the same conclusion: as protocols evolve into platforms, the key requirement is no longer adding more features but clearly defining roles and responsibilities—namely, how to efficiently optimize the complete operational stack needed for a platform, including infrastructure resources, developer onboarding tools, distribution capabilities, and more.

Looking at it from an even wider angle, both cases highlight a common conclusion: as protocols develop into platforms, the critical need is not to add more features but to clearly delineate roles and responsibilities—how to efficiently optimize the full operational stack required for the platform, including infrastructure, developer tools, distribution, etc.

Neynar’s core value within the Farcaster ecosystem lies in standardizing social data and user behavior through APIs. Neynar enables developers to immediately start product experiments without dealing with the complexities of centralized operations or protocol layers. Therefore, this acquisition marks Neynar’s entry into the next stage—enhancing Farcaster’s development and operational layers through protocol integration.

Although Lens has followed a different development path, it ultimately converges within a similar framework. With Lens Chain and V3 laying the foundational infrastructure, the next challenge is no longer building more protocols but providing a truly daily-use consumer experience. The partnership with Mask Network aims precisely to bridge this gap.

3. The Super Layer Competition

In fact, protocol integration and consolidation are not new phenomena. Since around 2025, similar models have appeared in Web 2 and Web 2.5 domains. Wallet providers, crypto payment companies, exchanges, and infrastructure providers are increasingly seeking to integrate adjacent services or acquire others to achieve vertical expansion and build so-called “super layers.”

However, the most important aspect is not the range of functions these participants try to bundle. Instead, the decisive factor lies in how carefully they design integration schemes—selecting the appropriate technology stacks and operational platforms based on clear target audiences.

The cases of Neynar–Farcaster and Mask–Lens demonstrate that the Web3 ecosystem is moving beyond the experimental phase of loosely connected protocols into an era of large-scale network ecosystems, where organization, operation, and technology are tightly intertwined. Even in the field committed to building an open internet, long-standing Web3 product teams, often centered around founders and semi-closed structures, now face the reality of competition: independent team structures, clear responsibility delineation, and the ability to operate products long-term are no longer optional but essential.

Looking ahead, the market dynamics around super layers (covering both Web2 and Web3) are likely to become more strategic and intense.