If nostr were the answer, people like me would be building on it.

Ask yourselves who the builders are that aren't choosing nostr, and why.

Then ask yourselves what all the people building here have in common.

Then compare these groups earnestly. I dont just mean Bitcoiners vs Bluehairsky. I mean their experience, talent, and reputation.

I mean the most talented and resourceful people; people that innovate, and have deep expertise. Why aren't they leaving where they are to build here?

Examples: Bitcoin Core devs, shitcoin expert devs that really do want to fix things, talented cryptographers, deeply experienced systems/p2p people, experienced entrepreneurs, reputable VCs and funders.

The closest I see here are people that got Bitcoin-rich and are now learning how to be angels by naively funding their friends and dead-end startup projects that arent much better than weekend hackathon submissions. A sandbox for playing.

Everything worth anything here is a subdivision of Bitcoin culture itself and Bitcoin privilege. Bitcoin is the only provider of talent and resources to Nostr. That worked great to bootstrap from nothing, but now what?

Deal with this, and figure out how to be relevant to other people, or Nostr will continue to be nothing more than a perpetual hackathon sandbox subsidized by a Bitcoiner ego-cult.

Unit bias is an issue with Bitcoin. Newcomers often buy Dogecoin or other altcoins simply because they can own "a lot" of them, while the idea of ever owning a whole Bitcoin feels impossible. One proposed solution by nostr:nprofile1qqsgeksa4tajm7x673gq2v7t56dkgkh6pjhhzdhrgxlpke4za8jmmkqpzemhxue69uhhyetvv9ujuurjd9kkzmpwdejhgqgjwaehxw309ac82unsd3jhqct89ejhxqgkwaehxw309aex2mrp0yhxummnw3ezucnpdejqetk0p4 is to shift the language from 21 million bitcoins to 2.1 quadrillion bitcoins. Bitcoin is a great brand name and using satoshis or sats can be confusing. This would fix that too.

However, I feel this proposal would create confusion too, especially for those new to Bitcoin and for the media—because for 16 years, people have heard there are only 21 million bitcoins. Explaining that the total supply hasn’t changed, only the denomination, would be exhausting. Personally, I think calling them “sats” isn’t very intuitive, they should’ve been called “bits”, but at this point, I don’t really care.

¯\_(ツ)_/¯

I love that 1 Bitcoin = 1 Bitcoin

meanwhile, on the corporate L2:

guy extracting millions in orderflow from rampant speculation discovers name-calling, gaslighting, and victim-blaming.