There's a lot of discussion, rightly, around how #nostr will be funded...
In my mind, why can't a client set a 5-10% split on all zaps towards devs/clients?
I think people would be generally accepting that part of the value for zaps would go to devs? It would incentivize features that encourage zapping and I think the volume is big enough to be desirable?
I'm a simple guy, help me understand why this doesn't work?
Because its already free for the non devs like regular joes like me.. ive been using this for free. once in a while when i can ill zap a dev but thats when i can Because i do have expenses myself. If i have to pay in the future to use this i will not use it because they put out the world for frre and no thats it popping tbey gonna wanna charge me sorry but i aint paying for something that was already free.
How is the Internet funded?
NOSTR should not be a project, nor a product, nor a service.
It should be a suite of protocols (implemented over the Internet's TCP/IP protocol suite) which establishes interoperability among clients, servers, and peers ā between clads of users and sources of content or providers of services.
In other words, it should be like the web, but using public/private keyed identities over an explicitly censorship resistant and privacy preserving event/relay model.
So how do you see the current devs being paid for their work? OpenSats etc?
I see them as people with their own agency. They can charge for their work, or not. They can release their software for free, or as shareware, or as proprietary software. They can build in advertising, they can link it to any sort of "zap sharing scheme" they want to devise.
I see the users of their products as people with their own agency as well. They can choose free or commercial software. They can donate, or accept advertising. They can write their own software. Whatever.
My point is that NOSTR, like TCP/IP and HTTP should be an open protocol and completely neutral regarding revenue models.
That's why we use the Internet and the web today. Otherwise we'd very likely still be in balkanized cells, walled gardens filled with weeds ā enshittified prisons.
It's pretty obvious folks today don't know about the history of networking, the Banyan Vines, Novell Netware IPX/SPX, protocols, NetBEUI, and all the crap that was eventually tossed into the dustbins of history by truly open and interoperable standards.
Maybe folks should learn a little more history before arguing over how to proceed into the future.
The protocol needs clients to survive though. And clients cost $$$ to develop and run.
I would be fine with a 2% split of every zap I send using a client like #[4]ā
Even if most users donāt zap itās still better than 0%.
This is how #[5]ā does it on fountain so they can survive and grow.
And if you have issues paying the 2% split, go to a different client.
Eventually the 0% split clients will fail.
Shit aināt supposed to be free!
šthis. Agree.
No, it sucks. Making everything revolve around money is how we broke the internet in the first place.
The protocol is simple and solid BECAUSE it needs to never depend on money.
Yeah I wish my house ran on unicorn farts but unfortunately thatās not the reality.
Making everything revolve around money? Thatās not what broke the system. The shitty money broke the system.
If someone creates a client that other people get value from, they should receive value in return.
Taxation is basically turning BTC into shitty money.
It's V4V or nothing, sorry.
That literally is v4v.
V4V is give value for free to everyone.
People will find a way to give value in return.
Taxation is forced, unnatural, coercive, it taints everything and that's how projects die.
Supportive communities are the key to success.
If I am asked to join a community and the first thing I notice is someone has his hand in my pocket... I will never have genuine love for that project.
I bet, and this is just a guess, but I bet youāre a pretty heavy Twitter user.
Never been there.
I see no difference between paying a monthly fee on X paying a percentage of my zaps to client Y or Z.
Donations is the way. Value for value (V4V.) It must be voluntary, it must come from within. Loving supporting communities.
"The protocol needs to survive" means constant changes that end up enshittifying and breaking it long-term.
It should be created, improved to some degree, and left unchanged for the rest of eternity.
Clients are a different story. I would make a free client the day I go completely off-grid. I believe good stuff SHOULD BE FREE, and I would make it with love, for the sake of it.
On iOS, you need to set up https://www.zapplepay.com/ to be able to Zap some Sats.
In Zapple Pay, you can set up donations. You can match the Zap amount and send to Damus if you like.
So, what you suggest is able today already.
Just not built-in in clients. 
been wondering this too.. should be a fee model tho relative to amount zapped, similar to what zeus does.. but it's difficult wrt relay runners.. too decentralised to zapsplit, perhaps
I donāt know the answer to this but what you are suggesting sounds like taxation. I would be quick to stop using a client that taxes my zaps in that way.
