I think that's way overcomplicating it. Nostr (at least as seems obvious to me) was meant to be, above all things, simple. It was never meant to exist in some quantum superposition of "the specific relay does not matter" vs. "the specific relay is all that matters". It was meant to be a simple way for people to communicate ideas with each other in a way that was hard to censor. Ideas communicated via notes mostly (and other ways). Relays were not meant to have personalities. They were meant to be swappable when needed. That's pretty much it. Simple as that. Everything beyond that is bloat, just hacking around with signed json events on websocket relays (hacking around that relies on protocols that all existed before nostr). It was never meant to be an API substitute for general app development, or a web 2.0 version of IPFS for decentralised storage, etc. It's scope creep to the point where, to justify that it still exists as something beyond a dev-kit for signed json events on websocket relays, you have to come up with these long and Deepak Chopra style posts like yours. (No offence, I can see the care and the effort, I just read it several times over and I kept hearing Deepak Chopra's voice narrating it.) And there's nothing wrong with better tooling for signed json events on websocket relays as an alternative to HTTP APIs, with benefits like more ring-fenced trust boundaries and a cryptographic audit trail. That's all good stuff as far as raw internet tooling is concerned. But that's kind of where we are now, singed json events on websocket relays plus plus. It's no longer nostr, that's for sure.