Thread

Hard disagree here. Nostr has a 1 big fat weakness, and that is a piece of software becomming dominant/popular and starting to bend the protocol to its will, as happened with so so many supposedly 'open' systems in past. Its only after there is a broad functioning ecosystem that this risk starts to get lower because the odds 1 party becomming dominant vs the rest of the ecosystem become too low. As it stands, this risk is still real, and as it happens, we have a client which shows red flags when it comes to this. A popular client with a marketing budget, taking the undermining shortcuts for a quick UX win. Per NIP-01, the base definition of the protocol, Primal simply is not a Nostr client. And like i said in my post, that makes my work all the more difficult because i have absolutely 0 responce in a debate with someone if they are well informed enough to lay Primal at my feet. What am i supposed to say? Nostr is vulnerable to a big popular bad actor, and Primal is a big popular bad actor... i can weezle around the edges, that primal could be worse and is not 100% bad, or even mostly not bad; and that they say they have the best intentions, and that i know guys that know them and they tell me they are nice guys with good intentions. But at the end of the day i will have to say: yes, you are correct, this is a problem. So i will: This is a problem.

Well I respect that you care about this so much. But I don't see how your rants help. Reach out and help them implement outbox. More even larger actors will come around and do way worse things, with far more power to outway the ecosystem 'safezone'