Replying to Avatar OriginalSize

The way I look at UX is basically to copy the most popular things in use or that I use. A lot of research has been done and money is on the line for something like GitHub. I get the reimplementation here to integrate with merits and rockets but would probably just nudge toward the familiar. Filtering sounds good especially if it can persist past the # in the URL.
Avatar
Niel Liesmons 2y ago

I wouldn’t discount the opportunity to rethink things from first principles on nostr though.

Especially for the UX/UI of something like an unstoppable collaboration tool.

Copying something doesn’t make it an order of magnitude better (just because it’s on nostr now).

Reply to this note

Please Login to reply.

Discussion

Avatar
OriginalSize 2y ago

I fully agree. I say this as a non-UX specialist who got by pretty well with the copycat approach.

Here there's obviously a lot of room for experimentation and with guidance from UX specialists like nostr:npub1r0rs5q2gk0e3dk3nlc7gnu378ec6cnlenqp8a3cjhyzu6f8k5sgs4sq9ac. I guess one way to support novel UX is to help fund research that demonstrates first-principles-based improvements.

Nostrocket excites me because even mindless, copycat UX can be posed as a problem, debated, funded, with progress along the way.

Avatar
Niel Liesmons 2y ago

I’m just really noticing this in my own work on nostr projects. Copycat UX can seem the easy solution in the beginning, but given the openness of nostr the probability on missing those 10x improvements is huge.

And indeed, in the end it’s just another problem on nostrocket, and forks can always be funded.