NIP-57 is simple, but satdress cannot support it currently since it doesn't know when the invoice was paid, and you can't have a separate address for zaps and lnurl because of the bad choices NIP57 made.
Discussion
Would it need access to an admin macaroon to know if the invoice was paid?
It would need to keep an open connection to all nodes from all registered people and would turn into a very bloated thing and error-prone thing.
And easy to DoS because monitoring all those invoices means keeping state, which takes resources.
Especially when creating a zap request (i.e. binding resources on the zapper) is free, just takes sending a nostr message.
So... zaps will only ever work with big centralized custodians? That's a big let down...
Not necessarily as long some good Dev can tweak simple ln@ Foss solution.
This situation could have been avoided. I am a little sad nostr devs pushed NIP-57 out of the gate disregarding warnings from @fiatjaf and others. #[1]
How could it have been avoided?
By thoroughly discussing the design choices and trade off's with regard to existing lnurl implementations, backwards compatibility, added complexity, effect on incentives with regard to centralisation pressures and so forth. Move fast and break things is not a good philosophy in protocol development imo. 