The work of OpenSats volunteers is great. I'm not sure if jack donated special operating funds to provide salaries to volunteers. But they can't make decisions based on a piece of statistical waste paper just because they are volunteers. They have a great responsibility. They are responsible for the allocation of funding for the entire decentralized Nostr global developers. This is the value of Jack's establishment of Opensats.
I saw some early Nostr developers who have been quietly developing infrastructure to contribute to Nostr. But many of them were rejected when they applied for funding. There was no reason. We all came here because we believed in Jack. I once asked Jack if he would still support Nostr if Nostr could not develop within 5 years? Jack said "Yes". So we have been working hard to make good products. We all believe that the combination of Nostr and Bitcoin is the future. But now the proof of work of our builders has been defeated by a beautiful piece of waste paper. And refused funding.
Isn't this ridiculous? Since Opensats has discovered the problem, it should face the solution. Instead of whitewashing it. If Opensats is short of staff, it should raise more operating funds to recruit volunteers. It can't be said that a few volunteers can manage tens of millions of dollars for free. This is not in line with business rules, and money should not be used to test human nature. Funding applications now take several months, which seriously affects Nostr's development. If this continues, many real developers will leave. In the end, only some GitHub projects that can make statistical tables but no one uses them will be left.
Not sure why a GitHub repo would be considered statistical waste paper… if I were screening hundreds of applications without deep knowledge of what each one is about, a code repository would be a good indicator of activity or inactivity on a project. Maybe not the only heuristic to measure by but certainly not something to disregard.
Oddbean new post about login | logout