You’re proving my point beautifully.
Yes, the UX is rough. Yes, the protocol has trade offs. But notice what you’re really saying: “I’ll sacrifice censorship resistance for smoother notifications.”
This is precisely the revealed preference I’m describing. You want the benefits of sovereignty without the costs of sovereignty. But sovereignty has never been convenient, ask any revolutionary, any founder, any builder of new systems.
The “condescending speech” critique is fascinating. You’re offended that someone would suggest your choices reveal your values. But they do. Everyone’s do.
Twitter’s UX is “better” because you’re the product being optimized for engagement farming. Nostr’s UX is “worse” because you’re a sovereign user, not a data point.
The protocol makes good UX hard because good UX under centralization requires surrendering control. That’s not a bug, it’s the fundamental tension.
You can choose smooth notifications and algorithmic feeds. That’s fine. But don’t pretend it’s anything other than trading sovereignty for convenience.
The builders who stay are solving these problems because they believe the trade-off is worth it. Those who leave reveal they don’t.
Your frustration is valid. Your priorities are just different.
Amethyst renders entire threads, yakihonne will eventually.
I think everyone in this discussion is missing the actual point, which is that perhaps the most difficult part irt Nostr is that it is reinventing the wheel. The web already exists; most of what Nostr has to offer is basically the same thing you can find elsewhere that already had decades of developtment behind it.
So this chaotic mishmash of a "we" have to figure out this new paradigm (crypto-key-centric, relay based), which is something we are figuring out as we go;
And in that context stumble our way into competing with fully fleshed out incumbents (and this is not just a dev/UX thing, but the fact its some of the largest mega-ultra-turbo-mega corps this planet has currently, lol, so its build up infra on a 1000 different levels/axis/dimensions).
And looking at it that way, both of you are right: yes its an avant-garde frontier settler group of people with associated mindset that will have to bootstrap and carry this thing for the foreseeable future; and yes its a continuous failing in living up the the demands of "regular" users.
The a precarious situation, but i remain both hopefull and vigilant. I agree with you that i dislike the tone of the OP, its a bit of a LARP if you ask me...perhaps its (self)motivating speech some people need to talk some courage into themselves and others, even if it is at the cost of the normies; which frankly is not the end of the world, atleast at the current stage we are in.
At the end of the day the point of Nostr is freedom of association, which means that there is no real reason why the current userbase should constitute any hold-up for others to embrace the protocol. And i don't think it is, things just have not progressed enough for other types of groups to start doing their own thing.
