The more I talk to big stakeholders (cities, states, corporations, etc), the more I get the "I don't want to build an app just for that. I just want to make X available somewhere and everyone can do their apps".. or "We are not good in making/sustaining apps but we have content to offer".
Nostr is perfect for that.
GM.
When they say “make X available somewhere”, what do they mean? Just a text file or data? Something else?
Nostr is perfect for everything 🤙
I can't stress this enough...
If people don't start focusing on the primary objective and reason for Nostr, it won't even matter what you think Nostr is good for, because nobody will use it.
Build the main use case *right*, then they will come. Only after that you can worry about the rest of the usages...
There's a reason why we do MVPs in business.
You can focus your own time on that "main use case" - whatever you think that is (pro-tip: there isn't one).
Don't tell others what to do. That won't go very far here. Everyone is here exactly because no one can tell them what to do.
The main use case is social. It always was, always will be. The “other” part of it is a side use case.
You can do whatever you want in your own time, totally agreed. I’m just trying to emphasise the need for getting the basic stuff right first, then worrying about wild ideas that probably nobody will ever use. Staying focused is always hard.
Every app is social. The new legal contract signing NIP, for instance, is a pure social app. It's just communication between the parties to sign a document. All government apps are basically social. Even health care is social right now. Social is not a very specific focus/use case. It's a **very large** category of apps.
Perfect example. You do realise that nobody will use Nostr for legal contracts (as if in its current form, a Nostr note can be recognised by a government entity as being legal, which is absurd) if Nostr fails as a social network first, right? This is what I’m talking about… Focusing on extravagant ideas that might never materialise.
So, your point is that a court accepting Nostr as a legally enforceable contract is dependent on the success of a Twitter app using Nostr. Now that's absurd.
The basic elements required for the agreement to be a legally enforceable contract are mutual assent, expressed by a valid offer and acceptance; adequate consideration; capacity; and legality. If those elements are in place, you can write things in a napkin, without even signatures, that will be enforceable. Nostr conversations by themselves can become enforceable contracts. It doesn't matter if the twitter app succeeds or not.
A contract requires a valid signature in order to be legal. That signature can either be hand written or electronic (using software specifically recognised and vetted as a trust service provider by the government), depending on the government rules. In some countries, a notary is also required, but let’s leave that out of the conversation, since it doesn’t affect the topic.
Good luck getting a decentralised network accepted as a trust service provider if it’s not even fully embraced as a social network… Who’s going to promote it as a TSP to governments? Who’s going to use it apart from the 3 guys that wrote the NIP?
And that brings us to the other aspect of it. How do you expect that to work, if Nostr fails as a social network and most of the relays die with it? Who’s gonna sign your legal documents then?
Again… fantasies…
Now don’t get me wrong, creativity is always awesome and we shouldn’t let it die away. It’s also very fun and exciting to have at it with ideas such as this one. But that’s the thing. They’ll end up being just that. Ideas.
Absolutely, and I think a great selling point for those big stakeholders is pointing out the possibility of automation tools.
