Is the decent private group chat thing easily solved? I have hopes, but seeing is believing.
The second point will be interesting. This high agreeableness/low tollerance for disagreeableness crowd will self segregate by blocking, muting and blinding themselves from the outside world like they always do (and to be clear i think this is totally fine, legitemate and principally have no issue with this); but this time in doing so they wont marginalize others directly via bansishment from platforms.
However it would constitute more of a 'soft' attack on socialgraphs. So who knows how that will actually play out.
Data wants to be free.
Tricky little basterds, i tell you.
My dude patience, the video is almost done, jeeeeeez
I just gave you the reason for why we are early; even a lot of developers don't fully grasp things yet.
I also told you i dont care about those non-Bitcoin normies; ofcourse they much rather stick to the environment that has a bazillion $ of funding and decades of development history. Where is the value add for those people, there is not any. At best they feel the current platforms getting shittier, but that is a push, not a pull, and for now same-old-same-old-but-with-bullshitmarketing stuff like bluesky will get those people before we do, and then fail regardless.
We are not building a social media alternative, we are building a whole new web, a whole new compute paradigm, its all new, its all different and it all has to be figured out.
Tiktok blew up in no-time because it is the endstage of a paradigm; the bestest fanciest horsebuggy.
Nostr wont win by competing on those terms.
You seem preoccupied with (normie) user adoption. That is not unreasonable but personally think this is not the way it is going to play out.
It makes far more sense to me that Nostr will take the margins first and encircle the center before capturing that center. The super power is in the interoperability throughout the variety of usecases; go for the niches.
I, and my sense is a small but minimal viable size group is already at the point of there being no reason to ever go 'back', and our options/usecases only grows over time.
Retention among normies/masses is terrible, but i expect it to be such.
Realize that Nostr constitutes a whole new paradigm that appearently most devs dont even seem to comprehend (fully) yet. We are, in fact, still early
My idea was to make them gnomes. Actually, if there is some artist with AI skills out there he/she can contact me, we may or may not have a job.
Should it be client based or kind based though🧐
nostr:nprofile1qqsyvrp9u6p0mfur9dfdru3d853tx9mdjuhkphxuxgfwmryja7zsvhqpzamhxue69uhhv6t5daezumn0wd68yvfwvdhk6tcpz9mhxue69uhkummnw3ezuamfdejj7qgwwaehxw309ahx7uewd3hkctcscpyug what is the 'KE' at the top right of the post? It was there before i timestamped the post(forgot to make a screenshot); and because it was there and could not figure out what it was i decided to timestamp (because it is in the same location as where the OTS indicator is, to)to see what happens, and it just concatenated.
Phoenix supposedly usses it. Atleast, that is what Josie said when i taunted him with the notion Nostr would implement it before Bitcoin
I discussed this briefly with some south american jungle spirit, and listed key-value pairs should actually work in terms of implied order.
If/When i find the time i will have a look at the NIP with the NSF guys, see what they think of all of this stuff.
I agree, although the sollution is rather easy by allowing users to set thresholds on what they get notified (and some way to signal/make clear what that threshold is). From there is kinda becomes silly to complain about getting paid for trivial to ignore spam.
'It was designed to liberate us from the tyranny of the state and the banking cartels'
Look, don't get me wrong, my intention is not to counter signal this sentiment/statement, but i do advise to get off the 'ought' train, because intent does not really matter all that much. For the most part it just results in fitting the thing into your own biasses and resulting projections onto the world.
For instance people complaining states addopting BTC because supposedly it is anti-state. Its not, it is a system that scales coordination by minimizing trust requirements avoiding the political frictions that occur in alternate methods. I.e. Bitcoin would be pointless if some world council could come to a happy agreement on a world currency and its (innitial) distribution.
In fact, looking at Bitcoin, states addopting it in the context of the geopolitical jungle is probably the most logical usecase for the thing. It scales politically, but does not scale on a """tx/s""" basis. Ergo, the masses were never going to aquire basechain-level-sovereignty, but states are. The fact that due to the neutrality of the system some individuals, and probably a bunch of organizations and business will, is as it stands now just a mere side-effect. Most people are just confused about this because Bitcoin had to come from 0 (starting with '0 btc' at a 0$ price) and had to go through its grassroots rise towards its destination. I.e. its going through the plebs, but it was never for them. (But any effort in scaling the thing towards that point is appreciated, as long as it does not undermine the system, see blocksize war for instance)
Anyway, long rant, point is: i am not saying Bitcoin is not a force for good, but carefull because by far most naratives around Bitcoin, even from "Bitcoiners" are utter magical wishfull thinking bullshit. Probably because libertarians are so dominant and they are at the end of the day retarded*.
*i.e. just projections of the biases of (young) males that are willing/capable of carrying the responcibilites/risks of this world and assume everyone can/should, and from that assumption complain about footing the bill for those that dont/cant. Or in other words, they dont want to pay for civilization because they are happy on pirate island, untill they become dads and realize sending their 8 year old daughter to the bazar with a gun and some good old streetsmarts from her own bootstraps as not to get scammed is not going to cut it.
Part of me things Saylor just wants to avoid any potential FUD during what he feels is this pivotal moment.
It is weird to me saylor supposedly does not want to softfork in covenants. He does not want reactive security on all that btc he owns? Same goes for Coinbase or all the other custody players in the space, you'd think it would potentially lower insurance costs and stuff no?
Do you have a link to the NIP/kind description? I am curious. Did you guys just assume the order in the json would imply the order of the parts? If so, then yeah that is not going to work out
Via https://alexandria.gitcitadel.com/ on my phone, using firefox. Screenshot attached where i scroll upwards popping up the refresh icon thingy to indicate .jpg that i am indeed at the top of the page whilst looking at the "conclusion" :)
https://image.nostr.build/891d5d361f8c7504c191d5f3c35583acf8b09262f8534fd7440b4f5b388256f5
And the chapter overview is also nicely in reverse order, so atleast it is consistent ;)
