**Lens V3 is for the Devs**
If you’re an active user of an app built on Lens you might be wondering what the upcoming upgrade to Lens V3 means for you. In short: not much… maybe.
The third version of Lens Protocol represents a substantial upgrade on the technical side, but if you’re expecting great big changes as a user, you might be disappointed. In fact, some of the biggest changes may actually be undesirable for users.
**Usernames and Graphs**
One of the most powerful features of Lens Protocol is a shared social identity and graph across apps. Your username on Hey is the same as your username on Orb, and your follows/followers are also the same. That’s not necessarily the case in Lens V3.
V3 introduces two new tools for developers to create isolated experiences: namespaces and custom graphs. In V3 there is the “global namespace”, which is `@lens/[username]` and the “global graph”, which is essentially the connections you currently have, but apps will have the ability to create their own. This means that we might soon have different usernames and followers on Orb than we have on Hey.
However, if existing apps decide to simply use the global namespace and graph, there will be no effective change to your experience.
**Feeds**
Another big change is the ability for apps to create custom “feeds”. Currently, when you post on Lens you can be sure that no matter what app your followers are using, they will see your post show up in their timeline. V3 gives apps the ability to create feeds that are separate from the “global feed”, which means that your post may only be visible to your followers using the app you posted from.
Once again, if existing apps decide only to use the global feed, there will be no noticeable change on the user side.
**Accounts**
In Lens V1 and V2 “profiles” are the main building block of the social protocol. They are NFTs owned by your wallet, making transactions simple, straightforward, and permissionless. In V3, “accounts” replace profiles and they are standalone smart contracts. While this affords developers new opportunities and possibilities, in practice, it means more steps for things that used to be simple. For example, in V3 if someone sends you a tip, it will actually go to the smart contract address; not your wallet. This means it won’t show up in your wallet app (like MetaMask) and might require an extra transfer if you want to be able to transact with the token outside of the social protocol.
Because V3 accounts are smart contracts, it’s also possible for apps to use a multi-sig wallet or their own wallet as the actual contract owner. This would mean that you don’t have full permissionless control over your account, similar to the way that profiles work in Orb when you use an email address to sign up.
Most transactions on Lens are sponsored, so most users have always enjoyed a “gasless” experience. This will not change in V3, and if you only transact in Lens-native tokens (like Bonsai), you might not notice any difference from V2.
**Lens Chain**
As you probably know, Lens V3 will launch on the new Lens Chain, instead of Polygon. While there are many proposed developer benefits to a dedicated chain, like lower and more consistent gas costs, there are also some practical drawbacks for users. Part of what makes blockchain great is the modularity of permissionless services; but in order for that to work, the services have to exist. The power of being built on Polygon, one of the largest and most-used chains, is the existing ecosystem and network effects. With Lens Chain, the network will be starting from scratch, and it may take time for services that you know and love to be ported over (if they ever come). Furthermore, a new chain generally means more bridging and potential complexity (especially for users that aren’t crypto-native).
Again, because most activity on Lens is gasless, you might not even notice that V3 is running on a new chain when simply using the social features of existing apps.
**Groups**
Groups are one of the changes that are almost-entirely positive for users in V3. While apps like Orb have their own implementation of groups (“Clubs”), the main issue is that they’re essentially a hack that you don’t own. This means that if Orb ever shut down, your Club would go with it. It also means that you can’t simply sell ownership of your Club without first asking for permission from Orb. In V3 groups are introduced as a first-class citizen of the protocol. They are standalone smart contracts (like accounts), that can be fully owned by their creator. The owner can assign administrators (mods), has permissionless control over who can access the group and the rules that govern it, and can transfer (sell) the group without restriction.
That said, the *way* a group is created is still largely controlled by the app that you use to create it. In the case of Orb, there’s nothing stopping them from using a multi-sig account as the group owner, effectively giving them similar control to what they currently have with Clubs.
**Conclusion**
> Lens is for the ~~girls~~ devs
As you can see, it’s almost entirely up to app developers to decide what changes you’ll see when V3 launches. The protocol unlocks new possibilities to build novel and unique apps and experiences.
If existing apps continue to use global usernames, graphs, and feeds, you might not notice any change, at all. But it’s also possible for everything to change. Depending on how much control an app wants, we could be entering into an entirely new paradigm, where the only thing connecting Lens apps is the chain they’re running on.
Horizons of Transformation
Arbzukiswap
