Dustin Dannenhauer on Nostr: Yeah, there hasn’t been good documentation or guides yet. There’s a lot of work ...
Yeah, there hasn’t been good documentation or guides yet. There’s a lot of work to do there
For your latter point, I feel it’s already permissionless. To make a new kind… you just do it lol (literally just start sending new events with the new kind in whatever format you want). That’s why I had to build DVMDash, because the only way to know what kinds are out there being used by DVMs is to ask relays. There aren’t any nips for individual kinds between 5000-5999.
Regarding why not “kind 0” profile events and NIP-89 instead… it’s just a design decision to help make it easier for people building and using DVMs to know they are working with DVMs. If folks were using kind 0, how would you distinguish DVMs from
Humans when you want to find DVMs? You’d have to do something extra and that could make kind 0 events messy…. And NIP-89 is already quite an elegant solution, and happens to solve DVM “profiles” too.
I’m with you 1000% about the “let 1000 flowers bloom”. I’m preparing for us to have millions of DVMs.
Everything so far is just guidance. There’s a balance of “let 1000 flowers bloom” and also I want to be able to find and use all these flowers along with everyone else. Anyone can do anything (you can put computation behind a kind 0 profile) but if you follow the DVM spec you’re getting the benefits of that (sub) protocol, and the tools people are building to use DVMs are more likely to work for the computation you’re offering as well.
Decentralized networks of coordinated computational services, with any kind of payments, is hard. Even this year there are new scammy projects selling tokens and offering the what Nostr DVMs do, but much more centralized. I’m bullish on DVMs, there’s just a bit more infrastructure, docs, and core library work that will make super simple for devs to pick up.
🫂
For your latter point, I feel it’s already permissionless. To make a new kind… you just do it lol (literally just start sending new events with the new kind in whatever format you want). That’s why I had to build DVMDash, because the only way to know what kinds are out there being used by DVMs is to ask relays. There aren’t any nips for individual kinds between 5000-5999.
Regarding why not “kind 0” profile events and NIP-89 instead… it’s just a design decision to help make it easier for people building and using DVMs to know they are working with DVMs. If folks were using kind 0, how would you distinguish DVMs from
Humans when you want to find DVMs? You’d have to do something extra and that could make kind 0 events messy…. And NIP-89 is already quite an elegant solution, and happens to solve DVM “profiles” too.
I’m with you 1000% about the “let 1000 flowers bloom”. I’m preparing for us to have millions of DVMs.
Everything so far is just guidance. There’s a balance of “let 1000 flowers bloom” and also I want to be able to find and use all these flowers along with everyone else. Anyone can do anything (you can put computation behind a kind 0 profile) but if you follow the DVM spec you’re getting the benefits of that (sub) protocol, and the tools people are building to use DVMs are more likely to work for the computation you’re offering as well.
Decentralized networks of coordinated computational services, with any kind of payments, is hard. Even this year there are new scammy projects selling tokens and offering the what Nostr DVMs do, but much more centralized. I’m bullish on DVMs, there’s just a bit more infrastructure, docs, and core library work that will make super simple for devs to pick up.
🫂