The loudest Nostr shills don't know its pre-history, and as a result most of what has been built with it is unworkable. The social feed use-case is propped up only by a spooky NGO/VC cabal.

Think of it as an signed and encrypted dns-free successor to email, not a social feed driven by engagement algorithms.

Used correctly, it's spam resistant and time delayed- not a real-time feed that finds viewers/content for you where engagement is the currency of a network state.

For creators to be successful this requires more of a Substack/OF mental model than a Xitter one.

The insights from Lightning.Video support this, eschewing the reliance on algorithms and advertisers means different kinds of content than what succeeds on YouTube are what do well. We already have had creators make more with a few hundred views on LV than they made with 10s of thousands on YT.

This will have a positive effect on the internet at large, content will be more substantive and less optimized for virality, ads, and algos. But coding these platforms is the easy part, user patterns will take years or decades to adapt at the same time AI Chat Bots compete for user minutes.

Paradoxically, AI on Social Feeds may accelerate this, as Social Feeds increasingly get overwhelmed with AI slop. So your content strategy needs to consider whether or not you want to compete with AI for priority in the algo, or zig while others zag.