Waterdan on Nostr: There is a danger in the Nostr dev community that we are too engineering or ...
There is a danger in the Nostr dev community that we are too engineering or programmer centric and underestimate the importance of product design.
The discussion today with some Nostr developers are very conflicting. Seems like developers are strongly divided into Nostr Native camp and Nostr Integrated camp.
When I started Nostr, I was “Nostr Native” and “Pure Client” so to speak. But over the course of last year, I am gradually leaning towards “Nostr Integrated”. In fact, I start to think about “Nostr Integrated” just 3 weeks ago.
The situation just makes my https://github.com/nostrworld/nostriga/issues/13 talk more needed.
When we throw words like “Nostr Native”, “Nostr Integrated” or “Pure Client” around, we need to be very concrete about what we mean.
For any conclusions, I am very carefully to understand how is the conclusion derived instead of falling into it, even for conclusions of my own.
There are ideological dimension, technical dimension, psychological dimension and many more. When we are discussing about things such as Nostr which can potentially change the course of how our technology and society evolves, especially as builders, we need to be very carefully and detail oriented instead of just “all in” ideas and holding opinions.
For example, when I say I support “Nostr Integrated” over “Nostr Native”, what do I actually mean?
One client can be 100% “Nostr Native” on the surface but not interopable with other clients at all. One client can also be “Nostr Integrated” and actually be interoperable with many other clients.
We need to carefully distinguish the product design choice and engineering design choice, which are totally 2 independently envolving factors. They influence each other but are separate concepts and practices.
The discussion today with some Nostr developers are very conflicting. Seems like developers are strongly divided into Nostr Native camp and Nostr Integrated camp.
When I started Nostr, I was “Nostr Native” and “Pure Client” so to speak. But over the course of last year, I am gradually leaning towards “Nostr Integrated”. In fact, I start to think about “Nostr Integrated” just 3 weeks ago.
The situation just makes my https://github.com/nostrworld/nostriga/issues/13 talk more needed.
When we throw words like “Nostr Native”, “Nostr Integrated” or “Pure Client” around, we need to be very concrete about what we mean.
For any conclusions, I am very carefully to understand how is the conclusion derived instead of falling into it, even for conclusions of my own.
There are ideological dimension, technical dimension, psychological dimension and many more. When we are discussing about things such as Nostr which can potentially change the course of how our technology and society evolves, especially as builders, we need to be very carefully and detail oriented instead of just “all in” ideas and holding opinions.
For example, when I say I support “Nostr Integrated” over “Nostr Native”, what do I actually mean?
One client can be 100% “Nostr Native” on the surface but not interopable with other clients at all. One client can also be “Nostr Integrated” and actually be interoperable with many other clients.
We need to carefully distinguish the product design choice and engineering design choice, which are totally 2 independently envolving factors. They influence each other but are separate concepts and practices.