Mask Network takes over Lens Protocol completely! SocialFi shifts from a technical experiment to a practical product

Mask Network fully takes over Lens Protocol, launched by Aave founder Stani Kulechov in 2022. Lens has supported over 110,000 accounts and spawned hundreds of applications, but has struggled to gain mainstream recognition. Mask Network explicitly states: “The next phase is not more protocols, but creating products that people actually use.”

The Gap Between Vision and Reality of Lens Protocol

When Lens Protocol was launched in early 2022, it was positioned as “Twitter built on Ethereum.” Kulechov reflected in a post on X on Tuesday: “We built Lens Protocol and its underlying on-chain infrastructure, including advanced decentralized content data storage governed by smart contracts. Our goal is to create a neutral social infrastructure that developers can build on to reach mainstream users with consumer-grade applications.”

This statement reveals the core philosophy of Lens: creating neutral social infrastructure through blockchain technology, allowing developers to build open social applications without relying on centralized platforms. Smart contracts manage content ownership, decentralized storage handles user data, and this architecture theoretically addresses many issues of Web2 social platforms, including data monopolies, algorithm black boxes, and censorship regimes.

After about a year of deployment on Polygon, the official disclosed that it supported over 110,000 social accounts and generated hundreds of applications. These numbers seemed impressive in the early stages, reflecting developer interest and funding momentum. However, they did not translate into widespread daily use. Most accounts are inactive, applications are numerous but user retention is extremely low. This “false prosperity” exposes a common dilemma in SocialFi projects: a huge gap between technological innovation and user demand.

The core issue Lens faces is user experience. Technical barriers such as setting up blockchain wallets, paying Gas fees, and managing private keys pose significant hurdles for ordinary users accustomed to seamless Web2 social platforms. Additionally, decentralized social networks inherently lack network effects. When users’ friends are on Twitter and Instagram, few are willing to migrate to a new platform with fewer users, even if it is technically more advanced.

Kulechov handing Lens over to Mask Network is, to some extent, an acknowledgment of the original team’s limitations in productization and user growth. Aave’s success as a DeFi lending protocol cannot be directly replicated in the social domain. DeFi users are willing to endure complex operations for financial gains; social users prioritize convenience and social connections. Technical complexity itself is a failure point.

Mask Network’s Strategic Logic in Taking Over

Mask Network has extensive experience in decentralized social platforms. The team has long supported Mastodon, a federated social network that has gained attention as an alternative to centralized platforms. In 2022, Mask Network acquired the second-largest Mastodon server as part of its strategy to expand the SocialFi ecosystem. This background influences its design philosophy for Lens: focusing on user experience rather than technological innovation.

Mask Network’s public statements emphasize the importance of culture, product clarity, and ongoing engagement. The organization believes that a lasting social platform cannot be built solely on technical architecture. Instead, user retention depends on a simple interface, recognizable value, and tools that users can easily operate. Based on this, Lens will serve as the foundation for applications designed around daily use rather than experimental features.

On the same day, Mask Network outlined its future plans for Lens on X: “The next phase is not more protocols, but creating products that people actually use, and the culture and truly thriving communities we shape together.” This sharply points out the core problem in the SocialFi industry: overemphasis on protocol-level innovation while neglecting product refinement. There are already too many social protocols claiming to be “decentralized” and “censorship-resistant,” but almost none are used daily by ordinary users.

Mask Network positions this takeover as a corrective measure, focusing on practical applications rather than theory. The group defines success as measurable behaviors: active users, repeated engagement, and applications that solve clear problems. This shift from a “technical narrative” to “product practicality” signifies a fundamental change in the development approach of the SocialFi industry.

The experience of Mask Network’s collaboration with Mastodon offers important insights. Although Mastodon is a decentralized social network, its success lies in lowering the usage barrier—users can register and post just like on Twitter without understanding the underlying federation protocol. Mask Network may adopt a similar strategy for Lens, hiding blockchain technology in the backend and providing a frontend experience similar to Web2 social platforms.

The Collective Dilemma and Reflection in the SocialFi Industry

This transition comes at a time when SocialFi projects are facing challenges. Some similar projects have shifted direction after long development cycles. For example, another decentralized social protocol, Farcaster, has reduced its focus on social networking and redirected resources toward wallet products. Co-founder Dan Romero admitted that the long-standing social-first strategy failed to attract a broad audience. As early as 2024, investor comments expressed doubts about mainstream market appeal.

Farcaster’s transformation reveals a harsh reality: even with advanced technical architecture and ample funding, decentralized social networks remain at a severe disadvantage against giants like Twitter and Facebook. Network effects are the strongest moat for social platforms, and decentralized networks struggle to cross this chasm during cold start.

Lens’s development pattern is similar to Farcaster’s. Early developer interest and funding created initial momentum, but ensuring ongoing user engagement is much harder. Most users lose interest quickly after trying the platform because it lacks content and social connections they care about. This dilemma is not a technical issue but an inherent challenge of social networks: people use social platforms not because of technological superiority, but because their friends are there.

The entire SocialFi industry is undergoing a paradigm shift. The early narrative was “blockchain will revolutionize social media,” but reality shows that decentralization and token incentives alone cannot build sustainable social networks. Users won’t migrate just because they “own their data”; they need better social experiences, more valuable content, and more active communities.

Mask Network’s takeover of Lens marks a strategic shift from “protocol-first” to “product-first” in SocialFi. Future successful decentralized social platforms may not be the most decentralized, but the most user-friendly. Technological innovation remains important, but it must serve user experience, not the other way around.