I agree, but not all desirable things are practical. I am not convinced that NIP-26 is worth the cost, but if proven otherwise that will be good news. Maybe we need Nostr 2.0 that fixes all the bugs with Nostr 1.0.
the thing is that even for that use case, which is exactly the use case I had in mind when I started looking at it (https://nostrit.com could be done much more elegantly if NIP-26 was better).
I think having a proper key delegation where user of both keys are the same person definitely needs to be solved,
but NIP-26, or something like it, where you can give *some* permissions to a 3rd party without giving out the full reigns to the kingdom, would be valuable.
Discussion
Nostr 2.0 is far more than DID key delegation… it will extend nostr to webapps where DIDs are the URLs.
It’s a tamper-evident web where anyone can host your website without needing to trust them, effectively decentralizing all websites with Nostr. Native apps are great too, but we have a great opportunity to decentralize the web here.
#[0]
It can also improve the security of websites because anytime a hacker inserts a foreign file, he’ll change the hashes of the website… the user or node will automatically detect that it doesn’t match the Merkle Root in the website author’s original bitcoin transaction.
Websites are stored as Merkle DAGs, so all websites become tamper-evident. It solves security, trust, and distributed hosting issues of the normal web.