We have to agree on some definition of success in order to discuss, right? Mine is something like, "a viable, scalable, user-oriented, replacement for the walled-garden web that provides censorship resistance and a credible exit from any trusted servers" What is yours? Is it that no design can be better? That other designs must be more complex thus worse? That newer systems are failures because Nostr still has 10k-50k active users? That if someone is still building their better thing, it must be worse? Because that is what you sound like to me. Incapable of actually evaluating anything critically, instead leaning on whatever fallacies let you stay the way you are instead of become interested in outside things. Nostr is not simple. Keys as identities is simple. The rest is a mess of complexity piled on top because of a failure to even attempt actual key-identity management. What if you are wrong? What if you actually learn about Pubky and agree with me? Would that be so bad?