I enjoyed the article. I also have questions - maybe just a simple clarification.

When I saw yesterday that many were asking some variant of, “did Pelosi lock Biden in a closet somewhere?”, my mind gravitated (as it so often does) to Nostr.

We appreciate the significance of the fact that a cryptographically signed message cannot be altered or faked, without implicitly demonstrating that it is no longer the original signer’s message.

In the context of “is the tweet real?”, one is left wishing for a way to verify, if one doesn’t trust.
 
With Nostr — generally speaking — the person who owns the nsec can claim and verify that their messages are their own. Scaled outward, cryptographic signatures will allow us to trust, by verifying, that the same individual who has been tweeting is still tweeting… as long as their nsec has not been compromised, of course.

As with Bitcoin, I find that there are many — countless — ways that using Nostr in place of the existing architecture would meaningfully improve whatever it is we’re trying to do. 

Humans are also quick to propose our favorite thing as the way to fix others’ problems. It’s natural.

I’m being called for dinner, so I’ll need to cut my reflection short. 

Anyway, thank you for the “food for thought” ✌️