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.
nostr:note1amclt7mpwum9xyg8wuh0glzruk89732muu9va8hewr2vcucc5evq6s5qma
Ironically, the OpenSats board would rather use a statistical table to evaluate a developer's workload than use the developer's Nostr client to evaluate the developer's proof of work.
They really believe in Bitcoin's POW. Maybe they would rather believe in the Federal Reserve's waste paper.
nostr:note17zk3myrzue34w6uxnwx32exs3sr42akcx59kpxhmxrm4nxy4tcqskmp577
I know you have no bad intentions. But it is ridiculous that you compare with a meaningless GitHub table.
First of all, we want to build a client for users. It is more meaningful to have users use and love it than those meaningless statistical tables. We test new features locally, and the number of application test versions is many times more than your table.
Secondly, this is our first time to do open source projects. Freerse's earliest use of GitHub was just because many Android users did not want to use the Google Store and wanted us to upload APKs to them to download directly, so we created a new Github account. Our previous development was done locally. All feature additions and bug fixes were done locally. If all these processes were uploaded, we could also have a beautiful statistical table. It was only because OpenSats required open source that we uploaded Freerse's source code to GitHub.
Our problem is that the OpenSats board should not use a GitHub statistical table to replace our proof of work. We did not upload GitHub before. Our client experience, our hundreds of days and nights of development and design of new features and polishing every detail of the product and the love of users are our proof of work. They should at least test and use our client. As long as they have built a client, they will know that these product experiences are polished over time. This is Freerse's proof of work. It's not because a GitHub table denies our proof of work.
Thank you for sharing. I would rather make products that Nostr users use than make those beautiful green statistical waste papers on GitHub to get funding for projects that no users use.
I hope you don't use the funding you get to make green statistical waste papers on GitHub.🤙
I was shocked. jackODELLGigiNVKOpenSats
After waiting for a long few months for Freerse 's application for OpenSats funding, I received an email from opensats rejecting Freerse's application for development funding.
I didn't expect Freerse would not be funded by opensats. I really want to build a simple and easy-to-use Bitcoin social payment client for Nostr. It is also liked by many Nostr users. I spent 1 and a half years building Freerse and sold my own Bitcoin. Why are so many clients that no one uses or even hears of getting funded? And Freerse can't get funding. There are also some people who participated in Nostr construction for a short time and left after getting funding, while people like us who have been building for Nostr can't get funding. I want to know the reason for not being funded? How can I improve it?
The reply received was:
“The Board noted that there has been very little Github activity on the project, including zero activity in the past few months. Please feel free to reapply in the future if you are actively working on the project.
Building up a substantial amount of proof of work is important for applications.”
I was shocked again.
Before applying for opensats, we had built Freerse for a year and a half. It was my first time to build an open source project. It was only because opensats required open source that we put the Freerse code on GitHub. When applying for opensats funding, my own funds had run out. I built Freerse, but I was just a product designer, not a programmer. I had no way to pay the programmer's salary. During the months of waiting for opensats funding, I could only pay for the maintenance of the server and the usual bug fixes. I have been waiting for the funding review of opensats to get the funds to continue building Freerse. I need to earn money to support myself in these months. After waiting for a few months. What I got was the board's disregard for the work we spent more than a year and money to build Freerse. Ignoring the love of Nostr users for Freerse. Ignoring our efforts to keep the Zap function of Nostr's posts on iOS, and fighting with Apple for two months through the App Store regulations in exchange for the Nostr iOS client being able to keep the Zap function of posts.
Ironically. The OpenSats board said that they want to see the updates to our github as proof of work for the past few months we have been waiting to apply for funding. Isn't our already built client our proof of work? Does the board only look at the surface? Haven't the board members used our client? Can't we apply for OpenSats funding for our already completed client?
Freerse's now completed client function is our proof of work. Freerse is fully qualified to receive funding from OpenSats. Please consider it carefully. We want to continue building for Nostr and create a simple and easy-to-use Bitcoin social payment client. Please fund us and we will continue to build.
https://freerse.comhttps://image.nostr.build/536bb9f5135be1cbe7af9800c276c751f2965b11457ee21fabdfdca0c366067d.jpghttps://image.nostr.build/5352f84d114c3d007fefafc38a79cc1381b14d56f2c38f8c34870c9d10bc7b85.jpg
I know you have no bad intentions. But it is ridiculous that you compare with a meaningless GitHub table.
First of all, we want to build a client for users. It is more meaningful to have users use and love it than those meaningless statistical tables. We test new features locally, and the number of application test versions is many times more than your table.
Secondly, this is our first time to do open source projects. Freerse's earliest use of GitHub was just because many Android users did not want to use the Google Store and wanted us to upload APKs to them to download directly, so we created a new Github account. Our previous development was done locally. All feature additions and bug fixes were done locally. If all these processes were uploaded, we could also have a beautiful statistical table. It was only because OpenSats required open source that we uploaded Freerse's source code to GitHub.
Our problem is that the OpenSats board should not use a GitHub statistical table to replace our proof of work. We did not upload GitHub before. Our client experience, our hundreds of days and nights of development and design of new features and polishing every detail of the product and the love of users are our proof of work. They should at least test and use our client. As long as they have built a client, they will know that these product experiences are polished over time. This is Freerse's proof of work. It's not because a GitHub table denies our proof of work.
Ironically, the OpenSats board would rather use a statistical table to evaluate a developer's workload than use the developer's Nostr client to evaluate the developer's proof of work. They really believe in Bitcoin's POW. Maybe they would rather believe in the Federal Reserve's waste paper.
Totally agree.
The Opensats board wanted a nice spreadsheet. Not a client that Nostr users would like to use. So a lot of clients that nobody uses and hasn't even heard of are getting funded. They're not exchanging bitcoin value for value. They're just using bitcoin to fund a lot of nice spreadsheets on GitHub.
jack, they're turning your bitcoin donations into scrap paper.
Opensats has always accepted grant applications. They have not publicly stated that they are short of funds. I am disappointed with their evaluation of Freerse's proof of work. They prefer to trust a beautiful statistical table to evaluate the proof of work. They are unwilling to test and use the clients that users actually use. And those beautiful tables can be modified to be beautiful with a modifier.
Thank you for telling me about these institutions, I have not tried to consult them. 🫂💜
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.
Our problem is that the OpenSats board should not replace the proof of work of developers and the love of the client with a piece of paper with GitHub statistics. This is unfair to all real Nostr developers. This is not a value exchange value, this is a performance of shitcoin.
OpenSats as a symbol of Nostr's public welfare organization is undermining the value of developers coming to Nostr.
Yes. Real Nostr developers are sad. Because they only build clients that have users. They don't make beautiful statistical waste paper.
The Opensats board only allocates funds for those waste paper projects that no one uses. In the end, real developers can only leave sadly.
Thanks for sharing and support bro. I will take note. We believe in the future of Nostr and Bitcoin. So build it here. We all hope Nostr will get better and better. 🫂
Thank you for your experience feedback. Freerse is a simple, effective and easy-to-use iOS/Android application.
The factual interactive data display of Freerse's posts is very comprehensive. Freerse can publish posts and long articles at the same time, and has a special long article reading area. You can easily and quickly read all the high-quality long articles that you follow. Freerse has a Gif keyboard. There is also a personal GIF collection, where you can use your favorite GIFs at any time. When you read other people's posts, you can directly add the GIFs you like to your personal collection. Freerse's iOS can use NWC-type wallets to directly Zap posts without making other settings. Freerse can automatically translate the languages of most countries. Freerse has a smooth thread browsing experience, and you can enter any thread to chat smoothly. Freerse has a beautiful dark UI design. Freerse has 24h trending videos, photos, and posts, and you can keep up with the latest developments of Nostr at any time. And so on. But there are also many functions and NIPs that have not been implemented yet. There are still some issues that need to be optimized.
If you are willing to try it, you will like it. I also hope to get your feedback.
Thank you for your experience feedback. Freerse is a simple, effective and easy-to-use iOS/Android application.
The factual interactive data display of Freerse's posts is very comprehensive. Freerse can publish posts and long articles at the same time, and has a special long article reading area. You can easily and quickly read all the high-quality long articles that you follow. Freerse has a Gif keyboard. There is also a personal GIF collection, where you can use your favorite GIFs at any time. When you read other people's posts, you can directly add the GIFs you like to your personal collection. Freerse's iOS can use NWC-type wallets to directly Zap posts without making other settings. Freerse can automatically translate the languages of most countries. Freerse has a smooth thread browsing experience, and you can enter any thread to chat smoothly. Freerse has a beautiful dark UI design. Freerse has 24h trending videos, photos, and posts, and you can keep up with the latest developments of Nostr at any time. And so on. But there are also many functions and NIPs that have not been implemented yet. There are still some issues that need to be optimized.
If you are willing to try it, you will like it. I also hope to get your feedback.
https://image.nostr.build/ce10eb9952772023b053f3ca5c783a2518cde4b20e4d61111f52af6ca0083968.jpghttps://image.nostr.build/bb07af768e640955a6a24b94beec135582deb199a0da72084b40e5d1f72cfb8c.jpghttps://image.nostr.build/e184b25d06543e66cda82ad397bfe64c38a4987a8769332c2683424cdba63406.jpghttps://video.nostr.build/a7d457ac66aaffa34cde65b49cd135d022f485e06029cd9a037de61933e6e4f3.mp4
Agree. Construction is proof of work, not artificial statistical waste paper.
Amethyst is a good Nostr client. But Amethyst is not equal to Nostr. If you have the need to experience other clients, you can try it.
Agreed. But now it's the only thing that matters. If the developer client hasn't even been tested, a GitHub statistics table will negate the proof of work. For projects that have no users, they can make a lot of special green tables.
nostr:note1cdnpqm290nqmzmercv0yjpd2fy89kxe6v70s4wp6nuatcfjwel6s8hv3fx
The 14 million missing votes may be due to their disappointment with the domestic and foreign policies of the Democratic Party during its four years in power. But they also dislike Trump, so they choose not to vote.
Oddbean new post about login | logout
Notes by Moss | export