It does lend some credence to the ATProto team's take. Basically their take at the start was:

- Network-wide cacheing is basically inevitable to preserve the user experience at scale

- Scaled cacheing architecture is expensive and hard

- If the protocol doesn't handle it, clients will handle it themselves

- Because it's expensive and hard, only a one ore two clients will truly go all in on it, other clients will see this and just give up

- Users will flock to the one or two clients

- Other clients wither and fade

So they decided to make the network-wide cache basically a commodity that *all* clients have access to and thus remove the incentive for each client to invest in building the same thing as everyone else (and to a lesser quality level). I think there is some logic there, it does remove duplication of expense and might help ensure a more level UX playing field among clients (though need to wait for first batch of ATProto clients to mature to see if this bears out).

I think Nostr's general architecture is still the way forward but it's worth digesting these takes.