Nostr Web Client

It is responses like these that make me want to offer a discount to any user migrating from nostr.land, vs having an ecosystem where each registrar would have purpose and many would be adopted for users to use for their use cases.

Your obvious conflict of interest is not seeing that it is better to not fight for users, but offer unique value to them to attract their business across offerings.

It is better to embrace the logical and optional addition to nip-05 and let users have more flexibility in the setup of providers.

I do not want to approach it in a hostile way, I want synergy. But without the synergy, it is clear who the competition is and easy to identify the actors preventing the synergy.

semisol 4mo ago 💬 2

The general consensus on Nostr has been to move new profile information to tags or new fields. The only reason the current scheme exists is only backwards compatibility.

NIP-39 defines identities that are not Nostr native and depend on external systems like domains, other platforms, and PGP. (this was removed due to a security issue but will be re-added with a new proof format)

I would welcome your change if you used the specification that it should be a part of (NIP-39).

But you seem to be overly hostile for someone that wants synergy.

Reply to this note

Please Login to reply.

Discussion

semisol 4mo ago

new kinds*

imp0stor 4mo ago

If I seem overly hostile, I am sorry for that. Some things are not easily conveyed via text. I am only trying to provide context of how things play out in various ways and may have been a better conversation face to face.