melvincarvalho on Nostr: These are thoughtful points, but I'd suggest focusing on "verify, not trust." Nostr ...
These are thoughtful points, but I'd suggest focusing on "verify, not trust."
Nostr governance is highly centralized—one person has overriding control, often contrary to community sentiment ("It's my project, I can do what I want"). This has driven most grassroots contributors away, leaving a small but dedicated group, including great folks like Alex. Meanwhile, Bluesky's interoperable standards outpace Nostr's, though neither is perfect. Nostr's stagnation (e.g., no markdown, editing, or smart widgets) and resistance to scaling innovations have stifled growth.
Nostr absolutely does not have opaque decision making. It has a centralized king-maker effect with very caustic people at the top. Developers are told, "This is dumb", "This is stupid", "We dont need this", "We dont need relays", and even "Go back to where you came from". Overt and blatant racism is tolerated. 90%-95% of the grass roots have left, but thankfully Jack's amazing generosity keeps much of the project going.
Onboarding is another weakness—while Nostr champions user ownership, the steep learning curve drives users to easier alternatives like Bluesky, Mastodon, or Threads. Transitional tools like subkeys or delegation could help but remain unaddressed. Decision-making isn’t opaque—it’s centralized and often dismissive, with a "king-maker" dynamic that's alienating to developers.
Still, Nostr thrives on Jack’s support, powering good projects like Ditto and Chachi Chat. But sustainability remains a challenge, and much of the development feels grant-driven rather than user-focused.
The points you make a are great ones—just temper trust with verification. I've been here from the beginning, contributed heavily, and taken heat for pointing out issues. There's value in Nostr, but its slogans often need scrutiny.
Nostr governance is highly centralized—one person has overriding control, often contrary to community sentiment ("It's my project, I can do what I want"). This has driven most grassroots contributors away, leaving a small but dedicated group, including great folks like Alex. Meanwhile, Bluesky's interoperable standards outpace Nostr's, though neither is perfect. Nostr's stagnation (e.g., no markdown, editing, or smart widgets) and resistance to scaling innovations have stifled growth.
Nostr absolutely does not have opaque decision making. It has a centralized king-maker effect with very caustic people at the top. Developers are told, "This is dumb", "This is stupid", "We dont need this", "We dont need relays", and even "Go back to where you came from". Overt and blatant racism is tolerated. 90%-95% of the grass roots have left, but thankfully Jack's amazing generosity keeps much of the project going.
Onboarding is another weakness—while Nostr champions user ownership, the steep learning curve drives users to easier alternatives like Bluesky, Mastodon, or Threads. Transitional tools like subkeys or delegation could help but remain unaddressed. Decision-making isn’t opaque—it’s centralized and often dismissive, with a "king-maker" dynamic that's alienating to developers.
Still, Nostr thrives on Jack’s support, powering good projects like Ditto and Chachi Chat. But sustainability remains a challenge, and much of the development feels grant-driven rather than user-focused.
The points you make a are great ones—just temper trust with verification. I've been here from the beginning, contributed heavily, and taken heat for pointing out issues. There's value in Nostr, but its slogans often need scrutiny.