i can confirm about BS and FC, both are retarded... FC is actually less retarded than BC because they at least don't embed binary data nor use binary as their primary message format, but creating a global total ordering just turns it into another silo and it's pretty sad they don't get that i'm working with Arweave on a project that involves both of these other protocols but recently i hear from them that they want to make arweave storage a fully persistent event storage for nostr and actually integrate properly with relays different mindset, they are more interested in the fact that nostr is a delivery system instead of being stuck in the global consensus mindset... i also had problems with the Internet Computer Protocol people because their nodes have one replication setting which makes the cost of data storage absurdly high, and were "talking about" making lower reliability replication schemes for cheaper, larger storage... but who knows where that's gonna go crypto project guys are completely mentally locked into the strongly consistent mindset and don't understand the most basic principle of distributed systems that you can only have 2 out of the three of CAP strong at the same time, and nostr has high availability and partition resistance (it's leaky, is how i describe that, it's not possible to stop replication across the network, partitioning is where you split the data) what nostr doesn't have is strong consistency, and that's the issue, they can have consistency, but the cost is either availability or partition resistance, and they are too dumb to realise that if they focus on consistency one of those two has to go