Tim Berners-Lee's vision for the web, or at least a key part of it, lines up quite a bit with nostr. The idea is to have different kinds of things that can be transmitted over a communication protocol—notes, profiles, relays, and more.

But there's a key difference. Tim wanted those "kinds" to be called what they are: Note, Profile, Relay, etc. The point was that anyone could create decentralized data exchanges and work together in an open way.

With nostr, it's different. Fiatjaf opted for a centralized set of numbers, which are essentially controlled by the NIPs. This approach makes things scarce by design.

The first way lets a thousand flowers bloom—developers build and innovate freely. The second approach has led to centralization that works for a small set of devs, but leaves the rest frustrated, contributing to an exodus because only a few can really get things done.

The takeaway? If you want developers to build on your system, make it permissionless from the start. Let them work in a truly decentralized way.

Reply to this note

Please Login to reply.

Discussion

As you say, "It still has to get started". Which is not a great position after 4 years. And most of the devs have left now.

you are so bitter about Nostr, complaining about its problems everyday. do you think Nostr can change to become what you think it should? are you trying to make that change happen?

a good starter could be to write down your ideal spec for what Nostr should be, complete with transport, protocol messages and schemas, give it a different name and let people read and compare with the current Nostr

I would be interested in reading it

I am writing something based on the #SAND stack = Solid, ActivityPub, Nostr, Ditto. Called #sandymount.

It will be machines and humans working together. So machines will likely read it first. Humans will guide the machines. I beleive the future is synthetic.

Nostr is a web protocol, that is one of 1000+ web protocols. It has to find its place with the others. Either it grows organically, or it becomes a piece in a bigger puzzle. In order to do the most good for the most people, you have to constantly be evaluating the entire landscape.

I was the 2nd daily user on nostr, and we grew it to 100, then to 10,000 users. I would say that is pretty good. I did quite a lot of the legwork to make that happen working 24/7 without pay to get nostr where it is. I will be a nostr user long after most here are gone. I would like to see permissionless development on nostr. I would like to see an improved devX. I would like to see an open web that I am happy to use myself, and that I can recommend to my friends. I have been fighting for that for decades, and I am not going to stop now.

C'est une copie désorganisée des travaux de Solid de Tim sur lequel il bosse depuis les scandales de Facebook Google Amazon.. je suivais le chantier Web 3 sur mon compte Twitter qui a dû disparaître techniquement... Il était question que l'ux gère ses données et d'usage d'apps P2P et le chantier perdure.. À termes l'ux peut interagir sur le Web 3 librement en toute liberté et de manière sécurisée.. Pour l'instant sur nostr c'est plus dans les thématiques sont abordées en référence au Bitcoin sinon peu sont les notes dans lesquelles sont les notions de libertés y compris les droits pourtant les développeurs continuent de créer des outils de manière participative et leurs ouvrages ne sont référencés sur la part propriété intellectuelle idem que pour ceux de l'art dont les œuvres peuvent être partagées copiées republiées sans aucune protection..beaucoup de notes similaires à ses journaux intimes, ceux de domaines spécifiques notamment médicales oublient plus autour du Bitcoin sans relation avec leur domaine d'expertise..

Peut-être c'est l'objectif des grosses entités de la crypto monnaie qui financent opensats dont la plupart est la crypto monnaies et dans ce cas il ne faudrait peut être parker de réseau social

This sounds like a serious threat to the long-term appeal and sustainability of Nostr.

I'm not a developer, hence I ask: could we still reverse course? Is the NUD idea (NIP-071) a viable and effective option to maintain backward compatibility while advancing to new more open design?

/cc nostr:npub1l5sga6xg72phsz5422ykujprejwud075ggrr3z2hwyrfgr7eylqstegx9z, nostr:npub1l2vyh47mk2p0qlsku7hg0vn29faehy9hy34ygaclpn66ukqp3afqutajft, nostr:npub180cvv07tjdrrgpa0j7j7tmnyl2yr6yr7l8j4s3evf6u64th6gkwsyjh6w6

Would be great to have folks focus on improving the devX to make development more permissionless—always a hit with developers! It feels a bit too top-down these days. As for the nuds, not sure they'll really take off, but at least there's some experimentation happening, which is encouraging, even if they seem more like an afterthought.