Thread

Don't confuse Protocols with Clients. Bitcoin is a protocol, Wallets are clients. Nostr is a protocol, Primal/Damus are clients. clients don't need to be open, or honest, or benign. Because open protocols allow for users to move with their data/id to other clients. Don't like a wallet, move your seed. Don't like a client, move your nsec. Bitching at clients is a waste of time. Build the competing clients is a lot more productive.

Replies (12)

Calling out practices or processes that are harmful or distasteful in software, especially ones that are not immediately obvious, is an essential part of a healthy ecosystem. Criticizing clients is no different than custodial wallets, or ZBD having full custody of your key. Light is shone upon these things because not every pleb will know or understand the difference. Let’s not have double standards when it comes to our software.
↩ replying to nobody
This to me is one, if not the most important, aspect of open source software. If we can’t rely on others with more skill to criticize and point out things that we may not notice , or have the skills to understand, wtf is the point of open source. The beauty of nostr, is that once something is pointed out, if you don’t like it, you switch clients. Clean break, no take backs, no sloppy retreads.
↩ replying to Sikto
Yes and no. It’s not that simple. There are some things are stickier than you may realize. Once something is built, even if it’s bad, it takes a lot of force to dismantle it. Even more so if people are using it. Now you have to convince people it’s in their interest and the public’s interest for them to leave, along with the force of demo. I’m still torn on the OS argument, especially as building becomes easier and easier.