Avatar
Tekkadan, ゲロゲロ! 🐸
50809a53fef95904513a840d4082a92b45cd5f1b9e436d9d2b92a89ce091f164
can't be verified, trust.
Replying to Avatar hodlbod

Ok nostr:nprofile1qydhwumn8ghj7un9d3shjtnhv4ehgetjde38gcewvdhk6tcprfmhxue69uhhq7tjv9kkjepwve5kzar2v9nzucm0d5hsz9thwden5te0wfjkccte9ejxzmt4wvhxjme0qy88wumn8ghj7mn0wvhxcmmv9uqzqwlsccluhy6xxsr6l9a9uhhxf75g85g8a709tprjcn4e42h053vanaunjh you win, NIP 32 was a mistake. I still think it has valid use cases, but it looks too much like an infinitely flexible sub-protocol and is constantly being misunderstood and misused.

Infinitely flexible sub protocols don't sound as bad when you call them that. Actually it just sounds like a fancy way of saying NIP. 🤣

Blinded by how bright the future looks 🌞 😎

Shoulders, knees and toes, knees and toes?

On a similar note, how does one measure the LTV, or the value-to-growth ratio of other protocols?

Seems like applications would have better conceptual approaches to measuring and defining success.

Looking at the protocol level for metrics of success is a lot harder when the protocol doesn't aim to be entirely public.

All metrics are gameable.

With Bitcoin we have never had much of a perfect picture of value either. Value is perspective-based. Individually determined.

No I mean like it's way brighter than I expected 💀

Let's see things get interesting 🦍

$FFIE #FFIE