npub1ra…jrkqx on Nostr: The value prop of nostr is censorship resistance, so naturally it is unattractive to ...
The value prop of nostr is censorship resistance, so naturally it is unattractive to shitcoiners.
I was running a thought experiment about inventions that change the world, and my conclusion (for now) was that if it actually and practically saves people time then it is inevitable. That's the number one feature required for mass adoption.
Bitcoin makes sense as one of these technologies because it is directly saves time with worldwide final settlement in an hour at most. It also indirectly "saves" time as a value scale which cannot be manipulated - money is a representation of time.
Now this could be me deluding myself, but when I consider something like this platform, while it's arguably (in small, varying ways) SLOWER than what we already have, the DECENTRALIZED, OPEN nature of the technology might just provide the edge needed to make the sacrifice for speed.
This leads me to my next thought, which is: maybe while the "time saving" nature is the most critical for mass adoption, perhaps a close second comes the technologies ability to be adopted by the average individual, and modified for the average individual's specific needs. Think about these points in terms of agriculture, electricity, the combustion engine, the telegraph, and the printing press.
I was running a thought experiment about inventions that change the world, and my conclusion (for now) was that if it actually and practically saves people time then it is inevitable. That's the number one feature required for mass adoption.
Bitcoin makes sense as one of these technologies because it is directly saves time with worldwide final settlement in an hour at most. It also indirectly "saves" time as a value scale which cannot be manipulated - money is a representation of time.
Now this could be me deluding myself, but when I consider something like this platform, while it's arguably (in small, varying ways) SLOWER than what we already have, the DECENTRALIZED, OPEN nature of the technology might just provide the edge needed to make the sacrifice for speed.
This leads me to my next thought, which is: maybe while the "time saving" nature is the most critical for mass adoption, perhaps a close second comes the technologies ability to be adopted by the average individual, and modified for the average individual's specific needs. Think about these points in terms of agriculture, electricity, the combustion engine, the telegraph, and the printing press.