Nostr is full of Bitcoiners, and as much as we like to think we’re immune from shiny object syndrome, we are, somewhere deep down afflicted by it like other humans. That’s normal & fine. But…while Bitcoiners have successfully suppressed this desire when it comes to shitcoins, it lies dormant, yearning for the least shitcoin-like thing to emerge which we can throw our guiltless support behind.
That thing arrived and it’s called Nostr.
As a result, we’ve come to project the same kind of purity and maximalism onto it as we do with Bitcoin, because it shares some attributes and it’s clearly not a grift.
The trouble is, in doing so, we’ve put it in the same class as Bitcoin - which is an error.
Nostr is important and in its own small way, revolutionary, but it pales in comparison to Bitcoin’s importance. Think of it this way: If Bitcoin fails, civilisation is fucked. If Nostr fails, we’ll engineer another rich-identity protocol. There is no need for the kind of immaculate conception and path dependence that was necessary for Bitcoin whose genesis and success has been a once in a civilisation event. Equivocating Nostr and Bitcoin to the degree that it has been, is a significant category error. Nostr may ‘win’ or it may just be an experiment on the path to something better. And that’s ok !