I just asked a collaborator/colleague/friend in Scotland to check out some documentation re: nostr. Wanted to see if she could make sense of it.
She’s a normie like me. Her takeaway:
“But for me, I don't know what a protocol is, so I definitely don't know what an open protocol is, and I don't know what value-for-value publishing means either.”
Whenever I explain a protocol now, I give the analogy of email protocols. Any similar way to say it apart from a full analogy? :)
A protocol is a set of rules for devices to communicate with each other. We use multiple protocols everyday barely noticing, like http for webpages or smtp for email.
Is that a helpful explanation?
Anyone feel free to correct me if it’s not correct.
Helpful for sure!
An open protocol is one that is not owned by any particular company or limited to that company’s products.
Value-for-value publishing a creator receives value on Nostr, in the form of zaps currently, directly from the person who enjoyed the content.
Hopefully we can fully escape from the ad model. In the long run it should hopefully incentivize the creation of content you want to see.
In our Nos branding we use the term “social media commons” which I like because I think the power dynamics of the system are more important than the details of interoperability (the protocol). There are lots of problems with social media, but flipping the power dynamics on their head is the foundation we all know we need.
She actually had an interesting point too re: usage. She was like “right now it doesn’t sound like anything I’d use because it seems like it’s built for builders and not users.” Definitely thought it was interesting she said that at first glance.
As in like, what are the incentives for an everyday user that make it less “unless you’re doing the owning, you’re owned.” on its face type of thing.
