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.
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.
No replies yet.
