pull down to refresh
23 sats \ 11 replies \ @Spartan 25 Jul 2022 \ parent \ on: Keet by Holepunch bitcoin
We don't have a solid base to build upon just yet. This is another attempt, and it may end up being extremely solid. Rome was not built overnight. More people building and trying new things is good. Once a winner arrives, people will move to it.
So for now its wait and see, but it sure looks promising.
P2P chat protocols have existed for decades. The lack of "a solid base" may be a sign that there's simply no product/market fit. In the meantime, pick your protocol and spend the rest of your life trying to get all your contacts to adopt it. Then, give up and use Signal.
reply
This is big news, not because it is a new P2P chat.
This is big news because it is a new approach to building P2P applications.
reply
Which could also have been said for dozens of the other protocols when they launched,
reply
lol, I do use Signal. The chat functionality is not what interests me.
Bitcoin is a messaging system, do you also hate that because signal? Just feels like you are being salty for no reason. Nobody has a gun to your head asking you to look into this protocol, you are free to ignore it and move on with your life.
reply
Not joining the circlejerk == hate... Got it.
Just being realistic. Network effects exist. If a feature makes a 100x improvement but has 1/1000th of the userbase, then the feature is still less valuable than the "inferior" alternative with more users.
I understand that it's literally "Day 1" and the network effect can only grow from here.
reply
Signal is not entirely p2p. It relies on their servers to relay some types of messages and contact discovery. They even use Intel proprietary encryption extensions.
Signal also dabbles in shitcoinery.
There is no comparison. Posting that XKCD comic was out of place from the begining.
reply
I'm saying that P2P hasn't succeeded before and people just use Signal because it actually has product/market fit.
IRC has been the dominant chat for several decades and is now starting to get beat by matrix (neither are P2P)
reply
I'm saying that P2P hasn't succeeded before and people just use Signal because it actually has product/market fit.
Then we should celebrate the fact that people are still using their own time and resources to solve this problem.
reply
What's the problem P2P is solving here? And why haven't the other P2P chats solved it yet?
reply
No, being aggressively negative on something that was announced today is what I am referring to. There is really no value in being overtly pessimistic about something we still don't even have the full details of.
Not all innovations succeed. Most ideas don't get traction on their first, second, or hundredth iteration. Nobody knows when they will capture lightning in a bottle
Maybe you are correct in your assumptions, but you're just going about it in an unproductive and needlessly negative way.
reply
Agree. The differentiating factor here may be the introduction of incentives through Lightning
reply