For profit but not necessarily need to be a ‘registered corporation’ tho.
I think clients should take a few % off zaps and work as a for profit company. A bunch of for profit companies and contribute to protocol development. This is how most standard bodies works - IEEE, IETF, ITU, W3C, etc
Still entirely dependent on the charity of devs. Funding Bitcoin devs have continually been a problem still. They should be, and could, be working for literally 7 figures TC at a FAANG. How long can Damus continue? Look at how dev starved Bisq is. I don’t like projects that is entire dependent on charity to sustain. Its a huge attack vector.
It sounds cool and all. But really only possible because a lot of devs doing above FAANG level quality work, *For Free*. Incentivizing devs, or really just make sure they can pay rent, and still work on the open protocol… is always the Achilles’ heel of open protocols. Including Bitcoin itself.
It sounds cool and all. But really only possible because a lot of devs doing above FAANG level quality work, *For Free*. Incentivizing devs, or really just make sure they can pay rent, and still work on the open protocol… is always the Achilles’ heel of open protocols. Including Bitcoin itself.
I guess I wouldn’t worry about centralization too much yet? This level of caching sounds more costly even then a regular node? Let’s see how it shakes out once usage is high, and it starts to cost to use relays.
Figuring out on how to build a P2P #Bitcoin exchange on top of #Nostr