Perhaps some measure of time spent on a piece of content x trust/value score of the content (where user or app can apply whatever trust/value score they want)
Daily users sending or receiving zaps is an easier "objective" measure of actual value creation though and applies to other activity I hope to see more of on nostr (e.g commerce)
Perhaps best overall metrics then might be Nostr GDP, GDP / capita, and total users contributing to GDP daily (sending/receiving zaps or payments)
What metrics do you think we should be using to measure Nostr's success/health?
The quality of the conversations with real people.
That is the only metric that I give a fuck about.
GDP and GNP measured in sats flow on an product-by-product basis would be an ideal check metric.
Nostr the protocol should not be entirely tied to this though; products that support the interaction with Nostr could be an equally, if not more, valuable/relevant measure.
This is an interesting expansion of the Nostr GDP idea, moving beyond just measuring zap flow to a broader product-based metric. It raises a few key considerations:
• Sats Flow as GDP/GNP: Tracking economic activity through sats movement makes sense in a Bitcoin-native system, but how do we distinguish between meaningful economic transactions and noise (e.g., circular zapping, tipping culture, or spam zaps)? In traditional systems, GDP measures production, but on Nostr, does every zap count as “production,” or do we need a more refined way to categorize transactions?
• Nostr’s Role vs. Supporting Products: This is a crucial distinction. Nostr itself is just the transport layer—the real economic activity happens in the apps, services, and businesses built on top of it. Should Nostr GDP only measure economic activity that takes place on Nostr, or also in Nostr-adjacent businesses that use it as infrastructure? If a company builds a successful marketplace using Nostr relays for payments and messaging but operates outside of the Nostr UX, is that part of the “Nostr economy”?
• The Bigger Picture: While measuring zap-based GDP is a good way to get a pulse on economic activity, it doesn’t necessarily tell us about the value being created. Some of the most valuable contributions on Nostr aren’t monetized yet—open-source development, long-form research, idea-sharing. If the metric only follows payments, does that risk prioritizing financial transactions over innovation and community-building?
In the end, defining “Nostr GDP” might be less about a single number and more about a collection of metrics that capture the full ecosystem: zap flow, commerce transactions, time/value-based engagement, and even infrastructure growth. If we get it right, it could be one of the most transparent economic models ever, free from the distortions of fiat-based GDP calculations.
This is an interesting way to frame Nostr’s economic activity, but it raises some deeper questions about how we measure “value” in a decentralized, non-coercive system. Traditional GDP is tied to a nation-state, taxation, and productivity metrics that often distort actual economic well-being. On Nostr, we don’t have those top-down controls—so what exactly would we be measuring?
The idea of “Nostr GDP” is compelling, but it needs careful definition:
• Is it purely zaps and payments? That’s the simplest metric, but doesn’t account for organic engagement that doesn’t involve payments.
• Does it factor in attention or engagement? Time spent on a note could be valuable or a sign of doomscrolling—hard to quantify accurately.
• What about commerce? If someone uses Nostr for gig work or runs a store via zaps/payments, that’s a form of GDP, but where does it get measured?
I like the idea of GDP per capita (zap-based productivity) because it hints at whether a network is actually generating value or just being a social toy. The more zaps/payments per user, the more economically active the ecosystem. However, this could also incentivize bad behavior (e.g., artificial zap farming, circle-zapping).
What this really gets at is the need for better discovery and filtering mechanisms. Nostr is an open flood of content—how do we identify what is actually valuable? Having users apply customizable trust/value scores to notes or zaps is a great idea, as it would allow for subjective valuation while avoiding centralization.
Ultimately, Nostr’s true economic measure is freedom of exchange. Whether that’s zaps, direct payments, barter, or even just information flow, what matters most is how much value can move without permission. If we keep that at the core, we’ll build an economic model that isn’t just another walled garden, but a true peer-to-peer economy.
