Another thing I just remembered from Rabble's presentation: the Twitter UX at the beginning was super complicated, full of instructions and roundabout ways to do simple things, and yet it grew astronomically.
I wonder if users if the past were smarter than users of today since now we're supposedly to deliver apps that have a single button to do everything automatically.
There was a time when normies didn't use Twitter
Early adopters are a special type. I was an early Twitter adopter. I remember what it was like. Then as the interface and UX got streamlined and simplified, more and more people joined. Different people. Not sure about cause and effect. But I trust the same thing will happen here.
As nostr is a protocol it can have different clients for different kinds of users? As long as a design is elegant it doesn’t need to be simple.
You couldn't post pictures on early Twitter. You had to use a third party service, twitpix. So people did. I remember Howard Stern had one of the Twitter founders on, I think it was Ev, and Howard asked him why can't I post pictures on Twitter? Why do I have to use twitpix? Ev had no answer. But Twitter eventually added native picture posting, and their user base grew. It happened gradually, it didn't happen overnight.
When I started on Twitter it was certainly quite different from what it is today but in those years there was no thought of developing easier-to-use applications like now, they just needed to work. The average normal user today is looking for something quick and easy and that allows him to interact with his friends without having to think a lot, today’s how the social networks got used to it. Nostr, having clients with different functionalities, will surely cover the needs of the vast majority.
I think an entire generation of application are built around the notion that UI/UX is supposed to be so easy.
https://www.amazon.com/Dont-Make-Me-Think-Usability/dp/0321344758
Also, like testosterone and alot of other things, general intelligence has been in decline
https://www.huffpost.com/entry/people-getting-dumber-human-intelligence-victoria-era_n_3293846
The meme that goes around occasionally that says something like: "40 years ago the owners manual of a car explained how to adjust the values. Now, an owners manual tells you not to drink the coolant." It's funny, but it illustrates a point.
When I was a kid in the 80's and 90's, most people who owned a computer could do at least some limited things with the command line. What they, as individuals could do would vary, but they could do at least a little.
But, not a ton of people owned personal computers.
I don't know how are adoption of personal computers would have gone in the same time frame if they hadn't become easier to use.
People really underestimate how difficult it is to create nice product experiences.
good
the thing is, when you want to have ALL the users, then you NEED to cater for ALL users, so everything is dumbed down to the dumbest possible scenario. it's not the best UI/UX for the user, it's so the app can capture the largest audience possible.
design for your #nostrniche
Well yes, like languages humans brain aim for simplification. You can apply the same thinking to cars, construction, finance, etc. which is frustrating in many cases.
Software users are always the same. Few people have a good ( not deep ) understanding on how things really work and how much is complicated to run a good piece of sw in any kind of application. Average user are stupid, no doubt about that.
Devs and company created an army of idiot users with gui coming out to every product because they need to sell product and attract more people, I am not saying that is bad at all. It's just a profit point of view. But if I try to imagine how many people will be using internet if you have to CLI a TCP handshake with a server? Fewer...much fewer, but for sure much high quality users,that's it. Giving every kind of things to all will create a decrease in the quality of that subject, I see this in everything: instruction, books, sw app, television...
My sad point of view is this. I am sure that a gopher user was a smart user than a facebook user.
I wouldn’t call it complicated back then unless you’re talking about early beta stage.
Hey #[3] how’d you describe this?
def wasn’t complicated. It was new though and could be confusing because of that. But the simplicity enabled people to create their own syntax like @names, #hashtags and retweets. Those were the biggest things that people didn’t get immediately. But ultimately, they made Twitter, Twitter. Seeing a @ or # on TV or newspapers or billboards was a free ad for Twitter every time. And then Instagram took it and ran with it.
"Astronomical growth" also meant something different back then.
