Good read, but feels like it left me with more questions than anwsers.

I think the author is right to believe that nostr will probably evolve into a set of more and less fragmented digital communities, simply because it is a natural tendency of homo digitalus (and probably homo sapiens more generally, although is is a bit less striking) to prefer to be surrounded by like-minded people and only interact with them ; and because a global nostr doesn't scale that much.

Yet, I'm not sure to find this evolution desirable. At least not if users replicate the same behaviour as the one they exhibit on centralised platforms such as Twitter, where they complacently isolate themselves into their own echo chambers. Having close communities is good and paramount to a digital life, but we also need decent highways and intersections to connect all those neighbourhoods together.

Luckily, nostr has a edge over centralised platform in this area, too. We've only been scratching the surface of this yet, but for example take the ability to use someone else's public key to explore nostr in their eyes. Someone seems like an intelligent and reasonable person but you can't quite understand how they can support view ABC in debate XYZ? Launch a nostr client connected to their relays in read-only mode with their public key, and suddenly you can start to see by yourself where they're talking from. And that's just the beginning.

So yes, I'm all for digital communities, but please, please, not gated ones. Close communities, not closed!

If freedom cant be taken away there is nothing special about it

The coracle has spoken

enjoyable read - stuff to consider here, and ponder on