It is definitely needed. QA is virtually nonexistent it seems.
Would any devs be interested in quality feedback as a service?
I think my track record around here speaks for itself in this regard, but nostr:npub1syjmjy0dp62dhccq3g97fr87tngvpvzey08llyt6ul58m2zqpzps9wf6wl and nostr:npub1jlrs53pkdfjnts29kveljul2sm0actt6n8dxrrzqcersttvcuv3qdjynqn in particular can vouch for my constructive suggestions that have helped them improve their clients.
You can also see my attention to detail, user-experience perspective, and knowledge of the protocol in my reviews of #Primal and #Amber and my #Nostrversity article about Nostr Wallet Connect at my website (built on npub.pro): https://www.nostr-reviews.com
I would love to be able to produce more content like that, but I have a 9-5 job that severely limits my output. If I could ditch it to focus on Nostr education and feedback for the developers, I would do it in a heartbeat, but I also need to feed the family. 😂
#asknostr
Discussion
Same as with architecture/design and devops because those three things consume the vast majority of development costs.
Coding is cheap, in comparison, but it's the only part you can't completely skip and still have software.
nostr:npub1s3ht77dq4zqnya8vjun5jp3p44pr794ru36d0ltxu65chljw8xjqd975wz is following what German logisticians call the "Maximalprinzip" (with the available resources, attempt to reach the maximum potential), but most Nostr projects use the Minimalprinzip (attempt to reach the lowest viable goal with the least possible resources).
So, they cut out architecture, automation, monitoring, testing, and maintenance, and vibe code some ish and then do a victory round and collect the Bitcoins from some useful idiots who haven't figured out that vibe coding has no monetary value because it isn't work.
We actually have one of the biggest budgets, despite hardly any income. Easily pushing over $100k in engineering hours, so far. Building something solid takes time and costs a lot of money. It just does.
I mean, if you think about overall resources, rather than merely Bitcoin income, we're one of the biggest projects. The services and hardware adds up to a small fortune, and we have some Bitcoin income, but there's no profit margin because we reinvest everything.
We haven't surpassed Primal, in budget size, tho.
Yet.
If you try to turn profits in the incubation stage, you inevitably strangle growth and quality suffers.
That's why grants have turned out to be such a problematic model: people usually view them as personal income and spend them on rent and food, rather than seeing them as investment income in a business they are building, that should be reinvested in making that business grow. That's why they slow or stop working, when the grants run out, or they jump to some other project, to collect grant monies for that. They haven't bothered building something that *generates income*, so their economic incentive to continue the effort evaporates.
And that's why they only write code, rather than build infrastructure and processes: you can just drop code and walk away, with no bills, no staff, no contracts, and no further expectations of services delivered.
Slam, bam, thank you ma'am, but make it FOSS.
It seems to be a sufficient model to build protocol foundations, where a few people can make a huge difference.