Okay, good.
So I've been listening to some of your past conversations.
I didn't even know that you were talking about this stuff publicly already.
Yeah, that's a twister.
Yeah, I would say that looks a lot more twister.
There's rain on the ocean and there's like a...
How do you call it?
The water hose, basically?
Yeah, I think it's a water hose when we're over the water hose.
So it's sucking up water so that it can rain down on us later.
I've always thought of seeing those on land.
Yeah, but that looks wild.
It's very, very far away, so it's very, very big, actually.
Yeah, yeah.
That looks really cool.
It's nuts.
Yeah, let me try to...
Maybe I can snap a picture that looks like something.
It definitely doesn't look like a cloud.
We can post it later.
And it's transforming.
Looks like it's going out now, it's going up off the water.
Yeah, the weather is something I didn't factor into the equation of, you know,
just taking developers for a walk and talking with them for an hour.
I was like, oh, it's always going to be sunny and perfect,
but we had hurricanes, basically, and rain, lots of rain.
So I didn't think, I didn't think of this through.
Just being outside in general.
But yeah, it's the first kind of conversation where I prepared a little bit,
so I listened to some of your past conversations where you're trying to
explain Noster to the podcasting to point out people.
That's probably good because I don't remember this.
What I talked about a lot of those conversations.
It was really enlightening in some sense because I've been so embedded on the Noster
side that I don't even think about it anymore in some sense.
How it is different from other things.
You get used to it fast.
Yeah, and we mentioned this yesterday, I think, very briefly.
Or was it two days ago?
I think it was two days ago where it's just like, okay,
there's a small little difference, but it actually makes a huge difference.
It has a huge effect.
And the small little difference is basically that the data is signed.
And so that moves the power from the servers,
which usually holds the power, to the key holders.
And that's also why the stuff can be in 100 different places.
Because you have assurances that it's the same thing.
Yeah, it opens up a weird, it actually moves the data away from the service,
which doesn't sound like much.
But then it lets you...
It sends the data free in some sense.
Yeah, which then brings up the most really difficult question,
and really interesting questions.
Do you need the service anymore?
Which is like something we've never...
Like literally since the beginning, the internet's always been...
What's the point of the service in some sense?
Because historically, because I still think we need services in some sense.
And we also, we still need servers.
Like there was this whole discussion, like our relay still servers,
and those kind of things.
And you were like, yeah, kind of, but also not in some sense.
I mean, it was really interesting.
It's always convenient to run code faster on someone else's machine.
Yeah.
So like that's a service.
You will have specialisation.
A server is basically a specialized computer,
and the relay is also a specialized computer.
Yeah, yeah.
But they are different in nature a little bit.
And it all relates to cryptographic signatures and identities.
It's like, basically, Pablo and I talked about this a lot,
but in a kind of a different context.
And the context is like, you don't care.
Like in the nostril world, you don't have to care where the stuff comes from.
And you mentioned this briefly as well,
where it's like, it can come from a USB stick.
It doesn't matter.
You know, it can come from...
I don't care where the data comes from,
as long as it lands on my client or lands on my machine,
and I can check the signatures, then we're fine.
Then I know I don't care about the source in some sense.
And it means the same thing.
It means the same thing.
It's like you said.
That's why you can set the data free.
That's the mechanism that sets the data free in some sense.
But you still need...
I mean, we see this already.
We still have...
Relay still have centralising effects, of course.
It's still convenient to have stuff in one place
for indexing and search and other things.
Really indexing and search,
but also just because latency is a nice thing to have.
Like low latency is a nice thing to have.
Because if you have to wait, you know,
if we were synchronizing large amounts of events every week,
it would be inconvenient to only get an update
from people you follow, like every week with all their notes.
Yeah, and we see the specialization in a really,
relay world as well right now, right?
I mean, we have different kinds of relays and so on.
What's your take on all that?
How do you think about this?
This evolution where we have like...
I mean, if you open anethys,
you have like six different ways of setting a relay.
Yeah, the configuration page.
I don't know anybody who actually understands that.
Yeah, the special is really...
I mean, it's the natural way of...
The natural way things are going to go
because you want to make everything...
It starts out as a dumb relay,
and then eventually you want to start...
If nothing else, you want to start like
categorizing the data, like putting stuff...
Like, the inbox and the box relay is a good example of that.
Like, what goes in the inbox relay is stuff
that other people want me to care about.
What goes in my out box relay is what I want them to see.
So that's already like two specialized categories right there.
Another one would be your draft,
your private things, and so on.
I'm still not sold on that.
I don't know about that.
It's like the DMs.
Like, it's everything under one key,
and then it's a lot of...
Because I'm kind of in the mindset of...
I've been thinking recently about the encryption...
Encryption and decryption functions in Noster.
And the signing functions by extension.
Kind of like the most expensive thing we have.
And the payoff doesn't seem worth it in my mind.
To be...
To have a draft system where you're constantly
doing an encryption and signing.
Yeah.
Just to like save something.
When we have local storage, we have personal servers.
I'm just thinking about it in the context of the remote signers.
Trying to make remote signers actually viable,
or offline signers, or hardware signers, anything like that.
The issue with the local storage is it doesn't follow you around.
So if I open a different device and I want to continue working on a draft,
what do I do?
It depends on how you manage your local storage.
Because local storage can be something like the browser local storage,
which doesn't follow you.
Or a documents folder that synchronize with iCloud.
Oh yeah, I mean, you're a sick thing guy as well.
I mean, I could make this work.
I think that's a big ask.
Do the synchronization yourself.
I mean, to me, that's part of the magic of Noster.
That all the stuff follows you around.
And in the case of Nip 60 and those kind of things,
including your money and everything else.
I think it is a very powerful thing to have,
that you don't need to think about anything in some sense.
You just log in with your Noster identity and all the stuff is there.
I think that is a massive, massive killer feature.
I think every step towards destroying some of that is in some sense a step in the right,
in the wrong direction.
That's how I see it.
But maybe, you know, like, I don't know.
The drafts, I guess the drafts are useful.
Because I have, I have used them like the article drafts popping up on various devices.
But I guess they're just, they're not implemented in any good way right now.
I guess it's my complaint with a lot of a lot of existing Noster implementations and features
and clients is it's implemented in such a way that the user doesn't see it.
That's why I vote Noster.
I can't trust the drafts because I can't see that it actually saved it.
It just says, I did something.
I don't know, did it do something and get to the relay?
I can't trust the system yet.
You spoke about this in the past, kind of, you know, how UIs and systems in general
like should never ever lie to you.
And if they don't lie to you for a long time,
that's what builds up the trust in the system in some sense.
Is that part of it?
Like, do you want to, do you want to, like, you're very adamant about
showing the users what happens underneath the hood in some sense.
Yeah.
Do you think it's important for most users?
Or is it more personal preference of viewers?
Or how do you think about it?
I think it's necessary for all applications.
It's just how you show it can change based on, you know,
how you might say, know me friendly or how slick you want the UI to look.
But I haven't been doing web development very long.
But the little I've learned so far, you know,
because I came from the applications I was working on before Noster,
were like internal company applications for managing like financial stuff,
like internal company financial stuff.
So it was like the auditors and the dashboards and things.
Yeah, dashboards and stuff.
People like looking to like, you know, what are the customers,
OS, what money do we owe them and stuff like that.
And so it kind of developed a way of like you never,
even if you have to do another HTTP request,
even if you do another API request, you never show cash data,
you never show inaccurate data.
And if it's stuck, you show something.
It's like, it's not, it's loading.
It's taking longer because the users would like,
they're not technical users and they need to know what the like,
they trust the system entirely because it's their job to do that.
Yeah.
So if it ever showed like inaccurate data,
then they're just going to look at that and they're not going to wait for the refresh.
Yeah, and it's going to be super expensive for the company
because they're going to make a mistake because they work on outdated data, right?
Yeah.
Like it's going to be very expensive down the line.
So you never want to be in this situation, basically.
Yeah.
It's interesting on the narcissist side as well,
because you know, we have big clients to do caching, prime.
Which I, again, like I'm a prime fan, like don't get me wrong.
I think they're doing a lot of things right.
But you land in these weird situations where just you move away from the
noster native way of doing things and you just land in weird states.
And like sometimes posting takes forever for some reason,
because it goes through their servers and so on.
And what I like about noster proper is like it's so insanely snappy.
Like you are never in an outdated state in some sense.
You know, like you don't, you never have to wait in some sense.
That's it.
It's very immediate.
Yeah.
That's what I mean.
It's very raw and immediate.
Well, that's the nice thing about it is like,
because you can progressively load data.
The events come in like a stream.
So you can start showing the user things working immediately
instead of like in the tradition.
It's so awesome when you're developing it as well.
It's right.
It's like you, it goes back to like just showing the user something's happening.
So the user's like, like the connection's working.
There's data coming in.
It's not complete yet, but it's coming in.
Yeah.
And that just builds more trust with users.
So that you don't have, because if it just sits there and loads forever,
and then eventually shows everything, the user for like the five seconds,
wherever long it's taking to load.
The user doesn't know if they're offline.
Is this thing actually working or not?
Yeah, exactly.
It's actually the thing I do, whether I, if I want to check whether I'm online or not,
like if my Wi-Fi is working and this stuff, I open my nostril client and refresh it.
I'll know immediately, because it just, it just, you know, it's so immediate.
It's the quickest way I know of, basically.
Like everything else I'll have to, I would have to, you know,
like do a bogus search or something or whatever.
Or, yeah, yeah.
The funny thing too is like what we were talking about earlier is like getting used to it,
how quickly you get used to it.
Because I'd been building and using it for a year, as most of us have.
And it's like, then you go back to some of the traditional social media,
and it actually takes a long time for that stuff to load.
Even on like my fast connection.
Like, I mean, whatever you think traditional, like Facebook, Reddit, Twitter,
stuff like that, like it gets stuck loading.
And you're just sitting there and no data showing.
And you don't know if it's online or not.
Yeah.
It's like the nostrils.
I sometimes, you know, like venture out into the dark corners of the legacy internet as well.
And what's so weird to me is that you actually, you never know what it's really doing.
Because it's like every time I refresh something, it's a new feed.
And the algorithm tries to, you know, shove something else down my throat.
I'm really allergic to that now.
Where it's just like, on the nostrils, I know where I am.
It's like, I know how it works.
I, again, like the, in some sense, how should I put it?
It's, I think it relates to what you said before.
Like the system should be transparent and not lying to you.
And if someone tries to shove something down your throat,
because they want to sell you something, both of these are not given.
Like they're not going to be very transparent about it.
Like with the algorithm changing the feed and a lot of all the social clients is like,
another lie is like, you remember a video you saw five minutes ago.
Oh, you can't find it again.
You can't find it.
It's gone.
Yeah.
And it's like...
Because you were refreshed or the thing refreshed automatically.
Yeah.
It's like, did they actually post that?
And you just imagined it or was it actually there?
You can't find it.
Yeah.
And so it's those little things that build up where it's just...
Yeah, it's fresh.
The thing didn't work.
The step before frustration.
The step people don't notice.
Like a good example of the step people don't notice is like,
you click on a button and it just takes two seconds to do before it changes state.
Like it's not frustrating.
So you're not sure if you actually clicked it on?
Yeah, you're not sure.
For those two seconds, you're guessing yourself.
And it's not frustration.
It's just something else.
Yeah.
It's like lag in video games.
Yeah, exactly.
It builds the frustration.
You have it a few times.
It's like, you can deal with it.
But if you keep lagging, it's like, that's really just rage going.
Yeah.
No, I think all these are the issues are super interesting.
I use no struggle a lot for that reason.
Like when I want to know kind of...
I mean, to me, it's part client, part developer tool in some sense.
Yeah.
Like if I need to sign a ROI event, it's very useful.
If I really want to see what's happening under the hood,
it's very useful.
If I want to clean up some of my things, it's very useful.
It's a very useful client in general.
It has a very opinionated UI.
I did.
I put like hardly any work into that.
It's funny because I saw it grow all the time,
you know, like you add things and other things and other things.
Oh, yeah.
Yeah.
And now it's like...
It's the amethyst of web clients in some sense.
No offense, you know, but it's like...
It's a little take.
It's really, it's really little take.
It can do anything now, basically.
Yeah, like that's...
I keep taking forever and make updates to it.
But that's the next thing I'm trying to work on and...
What do you have in the pipeline on the nostril side?
What do you want to build next?
Half the views, these don't need to be removed,
or they need to be moved to a place that's easier to find.
So a lot of, like, there's a lot of experimental stuff in there
that doesn't work anymore and isn't useful.
How do you use it most of?
Like what's your main use case of the client that you build yourself?
The social sides, like the main timeline is useful.
Notifications, but then that view still sucks.
It needs to be rebuilt.
You think so, why?
I think it's actually not terrible at all.
I don't think notifications work as a timeline in nostril.
Because when I go to what I want to know what I should care about,
what people are tagging me on, what people are mentioning on,
I'm not looking for a timeline.
I'm not looking for the order of things that happened.
I'm looking for the people that tagged me, the context they tagged me in.
You kind of look for the most important stuff, in some sense.
And I have to filter, I have to dig through a timeline.
Like the order of the things came in doesn't really matter to me.
Like, and also like the zaps and the reactions.
Like, I don't care what time those came in.
I just kid it came in.
Yeah, I like that it can be filtered.
That's how I use it.
So I filter it only to revise and quote mentions and those kind of things.
Maybe like, now I've gotten the vibe-coding stuff.
Like, I'm trying to rebuild that cleaner.
Next, get the AI to suggest some of the layouts.
But my idea is to turn it into kind of a dashboard, where it's like,
you have the in-box style still for like comments, replies,
for people like replying to you or getting your attention.
And then you have other dashboards for things like zaps and reactions.
And where the data is more summarized, because that's what you want to see.
Yeah.
Yeah, no, I think that's right.
I think that's right.
I mean, I use the combination of all kinds of things.
In Amethyst, they have a, I'm not even sure who built it.
Maybe it was Vitor himself.
But Amethyst has a bunch of contributors that just add stuff in Vitor.
It's just like, yeah, yeah, let's add it.
Approved.
Approved, yeah, yeah.
Auto-Eck.
But they have a nice visualization of kind of, they draw a graph for the last week of,
you know, the zaps and other reactions and that's really neat.
I glance at it from time to time.
It's quite useful.
It's like, it's more useful than I thought it would be in some sense.
Well, that's what I want to get to.
That's what I want to get to, because like, I found that like,
if you're building dashboards, you can't put the graphs in first.
Because then you don't know what you're visualizing.
You got to put the data there and I got to figure out how to massage the data into like,
digestible format.
And then you put the pretty graphs.
Yeah.
Because I want the, I want the pretty graphs.
I want, I want something that like, shows me, even when like I click on a user,
I want to see like a simple graph like activity over time in the last week.
So like, have they been active?
When are they active?
Stuff like that.
Yeah.
I think you, but again, I think it's, it's, I think you're on to something there,
because the reason, the reason why I mentioned the notification
type of no struggle, I like it is because I have it set to, I think what you want to
build as the next iteration.
I only have it set like, if someone mentions me, if someone replies to me,
if someone quotes something that I put out in the past and so on,
then that's all I filter for.
So that's all I see.
So I hide all reactions.
I hide all steps and so on and so forth.
That's what, that's the only, that's kind of what time I saw before.
Kind of almost like a, like a DM, but for public dimensions, like a DM,
because I ignore all the amps.
It's just like, it's, it's, it's, it's beyond repair.
My DMs are beyond repair.
So I stopped looking a long time ago, but, but, uh, you know, I, I liked, uh,
I'm also, I'm a way bigger fan of public conversations than DMs in some sense.
Because most of the time when people reach out to me,
I'm not even the best person to answer it.
Yeah, you just want to tag someone else into the same thing.
Exactly, just to ask the question kind of publicly,
because most of the time it's questions and stuff and so on.
And it's not even private stuff.
I mean, you know, like I buy, I, I do care about
encrypted communication and private communication and so on for private stuff.
But most of the things we are dealing with, like we are building in public anyway.
We're also discussing in public.
We're also like, you know, we're having the conversation where things should go
with public.
We're working, we're, we're using and living on a protocol.
Exactly.
No, no, has always no.
So if you have a question for another person, just ask it and tag the person.
And chances are either they will reply or someone else who is more qualified will reply.
And both of those are great outcomes.
Yeah.
And if you just use DMs, then you, you block yourself off from the, off from the great outcomes.
What do you think about just removing DMs?
Because I've been thinking about this for the, I guess, the last, last few weeks.
Yeah.
Has been looking into like NIP 17 more finally.
And I mean, it, it, it relates to what it's not about the draft.
It's like, it's, it's very expensive operations.
I'm not sure if the M's truly should live on Noster in some sense.
I mean, I guess they have their use.
I was thinking is like, what if we just remove them and you go, kind of go with,
I think what like Skypad at one point or other platforms have where they had
support for just like, here's my link to talk to me on this platform.
Yeah.
Like here's my simplex link.
Here's my telegram link.
Here's my signal link.
Yeah.
I'm just kind of promoting that more on the user profile.
No, no one stops.
No one stops simplex and those kinds of solutions to use Noster as like a,
the substrate for lookups, the 10 shades, basically.
That's true too.
Yeah.
And that's, that's what, where I think that might just happen all the time,
where it's, I want to initiate a conversation with someone who is on Noster.
And I want to use this channel.
And like the, you know, you can't do the handshake this way.
It's very much like the Bitcoin wall that's integrating Noster lookups to send money to.
It's like, I just need your lighting address, basically.
Yeah.
And it's like, and it's very easy to look it up over Noster.
So you have like a sent to address book and so on.
That would, that would might be the best solution for, because a lot of people use
simplex and then the signal and, I mean, it always changes every single time one of them gets
from one thing, but, you know, there's always one that a lot of people are using.
Yeah.
It wouldn't be very difficult to add like a simple link.
Yeah.
Contact information basically.
Getting the M's right is really hard because, because people, like one on one,
the M's are one thing.
That's already hard, but people really love group chats and getting group chats right
is really, really hard.
I mean, there's like five different people working on it on the Noster side right now.
And we'll see what kind of protocol, what kind of approach wins out.
And the thing about the group chat part is that how private is a group chat, really?
Like, you have to differentiate between a group chat between three people,
which is reasonably private, probably, or like 500 people, where there's the likelihood of being
a mole in there or someone who just streams the whole chat to Twitch or takes screenshots every
five minutes.
It's like basically a hundred percent.
It's like it works too in the future.
So why encrypt all the things?
You know what I mean?
It's like, why share secrets between 500 people and do all the fancy cryptography stuff that's
like super, super, super expensive and hard to do if the group chat size is like 500 people.
Like, it's don't assume privacy if you're talking in a room of 500 people.
Yeah, it's a weird, and the funny part is you wouldn't assume that if you were standing
next within a group of 500 people in the real world, you wouldn't assume that at all.
But something about the technology hides that.
Yeah, no, especially I think the engineering mindset wants to get it perfect, you know?
Yeah, yeah.
And it's like, it's a complete waste of time.
It's like, you might as well switch off encryption if the group chat is above like,
you know, 20 people or whatever.
It's like, at a certain point, it's useless.
You'll either have a mole or an asshole in there.
It's like, and it doesn't matter.
Like, someone's going to leak all the things.
Someone's just going to back it up, archive it.
Yeah, exactly.
I mean, it's like, I mean, me and my friends, like, there's like three of us.
We have a small Discord server from way back in the day.
And I have all of the, all of the chats downloaded this text file stored somewhere.
Yeah.
Because I was planning on dumping them into some AI program.
With sync thing across like 15 different devices.
Yeah, so like, that's just three of us.
And that's, that data is already like stored for everywhere.
Going to be leaked at some point.
Probably.
So, yeah, it's kind of that point to exactly, but.
Yeah, I don't know.
It's a really hard question.
It's like, I, because, I mean, what attracted me to, to Nostra and still does is, is,
because it's raw, it's immediate, and it's very, very simple.
And, and to your point, you know, like being cryptographic operations,
being expensive and all those kinds of things.
Having encrypted group chats on Nostra directly is not very simple.
Like there's some, the simplicity stops.
Because you lose, you don't have consistent state,
which is the first problem you get over.
And like public groups, the NIP 29 kind of.
And with Nostra proper, you never will have consistent state.
That's kind of the, the thing, the thing to understand.
Like if you actually use Nostra properly, how it was designed.
Well, if you agree.
You cannot guarantee consistent state.
You don't have a server that can guarantee consistent state.
If you agree on a server, you can negotiate like consistent state.
But yeah, again, if you're not, if you're trying to.
There's very few situations where it makes sense to agree on a server.
Like on a relay.
Yeah, but then again, it's like an anti-pattern, right?
Like the beauty of Nostra and the simplicity comes from it.
That there is no global and you don't have data consistency guarantees
and all those kinds of things.
Like it strikes a different tradeoff balance.
And trying to shoehorn it into a use case
where you need perfect data consistency.
It's kind of an anti-pattern in a Nostra world.
There's one, there's one use case where I think it does make sense to like
agree on a relay or a server or whatnot.
And that is like community infrastructure.
Oh, yeah, okay, fair enough.
Like a lot of what we discord in.
It's like the self-hosted idea basically.
Yes, yeah, yeah.
Like what people use matrix servers for now.
Yeah.
They all agree on the same.
And someone runs the server.
The server's maintained.
Server has features.
Yeah, and you basically invite only whitelist the people.
Yeah, stuff like that.
That makes a lot of sense.
But in other cases, if I'm just talking to strangers on the internet,
like it's impossible to think.
Yeah.
I mean, we're in the process of figuring all that out.
You just mentioned before that, you know,
byte coding is going to make the notification
if you have no struggle great again.
So what's your experience being the last couple of weeks
getting into the byte coding world?
Do you have high hopes for it?
Like the opinions are very split online,
whether it's useful or not.
Or like, you know, will we produce AI slot forever?
People have to argue online.
Ah, yeah.
And it's going to work.
It's going to work.
I mean, we suspected that from the beginning.
And like I said, the last few weeks is a lot of good evidence
that it definitely does work.
Whether it's maintainable though,
like that's the interesting, the last interesting question.
Because, I mean, there's a reason why Pablo loves it so much, right?
He can just shit out in that game.
But Amanda did not maintain it anymore.
Now he can do it on steroids.
Well, that's the interesting part is like,
what does it, because the code's definitely not maintainable.
It produces.
And if it keeps producing, it produces really,
in the best of worlds, it produces code that is somewhat maintainable.
Yeah.
But does it really matter anymore if you can just regenerate some of the code?
And basically, if you go to more of a modular approach,
and you can just...
Yeah, fair enough.
Okay.
Generate, you can just, like something doesn't work.
Trusting talks about this as well.
Like small, specialized things, basically.
It pushes things.
It either pushes things in two directions I see.
It's like, it's small, specialized things.
Where like, your UI components are built independently
and plug in in easy ways to your, primarily,
your application logic and stuff works in a very modular way.
Or it kind of goes in the other way where,
or just both, where it just embraces wholeheartedly,
like, a framework that does everything, like next to it.
Yes.
Yeah.
It seems to do both of those really well.
But the interesting thing is,
it doesn't produce maintainable code in either situation.
Or what, you know,
from the developer's opinion, perfect code.
But then...
Don't you think that's fixable with,
basically, larger models and larger context windows?
Yeah, and then we'll just try to do more complicated things.
And it's not fixed a lot more.
Fair enough.
Yeah, yeah.
Okay.
That's the...
So yeah, I mean, it's like building a broader highway.
Yeah.
People more people.
More parts of it.
Yeah.
Like, it nails buttons now.
You want UI components.
It can build you, all the UI components.
Yeah.
But now we're trying to do more.
And so, I, well,
I get it's a lot like Bitcoin and all the other emerging technologies where
it's never, it never works.
We never think it works because we're always looking at like what we're working on right now.
Yeah.
And if you turn around and look back, it works amazing.
Yeah.
For everything it's already fixed.
That's the funny thing about humanity.
Like, we only call the things technology that just don't work right yet.
You know, like chairs, we stopped calling chairs technology.
Or doors.
They're just chairs and doors.
Yeah, all that stuff.
That just works.
It just works.
It's not technology anymore.
But everything that's kind of half broken.
Or just, you know, fails sometimes.
It's still technology.
Yeah.
That's an interesting point.
That point like computers have been technology for.
For a long time.
Yeah.
I think it's because computers are not a static thing, right?
It's like they're always evolving with us in some sense.
Like our modern computers are very different.
And like the, you know, big machines that fill the whole buildings in the 70s.
You know, it's like, it's, it's very, very different.
Yeah, they're not, they're not a machine anymore.
It's something else.
Yeah.
Cars are kind of, you know, a car is a car.
But it's still, they, they, they, they, modern cars still are.
Yeah, like a slice of technology.
Yeah.
Because it doesn't work well.
Yeah, exactly.
It just breaks down sometimes.
But yeah, a tractor.
We don't think of a tractor as technology anymore.
It's a, it's a piece of equipment now.
Yeah.
Or like books.
I mentioned books a lot, you know, where it's like books are absolutely technology.
Books are, are human technology and are a psycho technology and so on.
And we don't view books as technology, like at all.
Yeah.
But we, like there was a time where it didn't have books, you know, like it's just,
it's just people forget.
It's actually a human invention.
Yeah.
But yeah, no, I mean, for me, some of this not just blew my mind.
And I, to me, it's out of the question that it will
accelerate things massively.
Good and bad in some sense.
Like, like in the sense of, I think it will accelerate
what we are building massively, but I think it will also accelerate what,
I don't know, the world coin people and this kind of people are building, you know, like it's,
it's just open AI and, and
It'll take longer on their front, I think, because
I mean, they have infinite money.
That's the difference.
We have limited money.
Yeah, but they have infinite money, but they have the problem of being greedy,
which is, which really inhibits their ability to work together.
Like the cooperation.
Yeah.
Almost non-existent.
Oh, that's fair.
It's, it's, it's competitive silos.
It's not synergistic.
Yeah.
Cooperation just because we want to do something working at some point,
but it'll take them longer than we like, it's taking them longer than some of us have expected
to get, uh, CBDCs.
Yeah.
Because we knew they're coming.
They are coming.
Oh, they are absolutely coming.
Yeah.
They can't work.
Every government thing that's working on CBDCs is building it in the silo.
They're not talking to each other.
They're not even helping each other in some sense.
Yeah.
And so it would have come sooner if they'd actually like somehow all agreed on one CBDC to use.
By the way, I was like, oh, it's such a beautiful day.
No wind, no rain.
It's going to be perfect.
And now we're walking next to waterfalls and big waves.
So noisy as fuck again.
But that's fine.
I just, you know, like, I only want the people to listen that are able to suffer
through the bad quality with us.
That's kind of an entry point already, you know, like, or a filter already.
I only want the most interested people to listen.
I don't know the same way I've taken with a lot of podcasts.
Now I've gone through the usual cycle everyone does, which is, uh,
it's probably smart if we turn around, I think.
Yeah.
The fence is falling down, but we can't do it.
But just also the, it's kind of get, it's not necessarily going to get better with the noise.
But yeah, it's a good, it's a good filter to make things hard in some sense.
Like, again, for the, for the cohort, for example, it's like,
you actually have to come to the island.
Yeah.
You have to, you know, like, make time for it.
You have to come here on your own dime, all those kinds of things.
And it filters out, it filters out the slop a bit.
It's like, only people that really want to be here and want to work on this stuff are here.
So I think it's similar on an ostracide, right?
Like, it's like, you have to put in the work to actually use an ostrand, an ostrand, an ostrand, in some sense.
So it's very, we have a, we have some barrier to entry.
And that's not necessarily always a bad thing, I think.
Yeah.
Unfortunately, like, you can't ever know, but it seems to filter out a lot of people who
could thrive, like an ostrand, other stuff like that.
But you can't know, because you have to have some sort of filter.
Like, it's...
What kind of people are you thinking about?
Well, in the case, like, this, like, sovereign engineering, like, coming to an island and all that, like,
it definitely feels like people who can't travel.
Oh, yeah, that's true. But on the ostracide, I mean...
Oh, the ostracide.
There's people who do a lot of interesting stuff in the world.
Activists, people who publish, publish things, artists, stuff like that.
Who just can't quite, they just don't quite know how to use it.
They just can't put the time into using technology.
And a lot of those existing platforms, like, you know, Facebook, log in with your phone number,
like, are low enough, like, it works for them, because whenever they forget their password,
they just, like, reset it with their phone number.
What would be the main benefit for them, if you have them in mind?
Because I saw you, I saw you were following some artists and someone making sketches of
Pedro Natsu or whatever.
Yeah, I'm trying to collect as many artists on those things as I can, because, like,
it's the most... I like looking at that stuff, selfishly.
I want to see more pictures, just because I like zapping that stuff, and...
I think that's the main benefit, actually, of being there,
that you can actually just straight up receive money very easily outright.
Oh, absolutely, yeah.
And artists are usually getting screwed by all the platforms, especially the smaller ones.
So we see this in the value-for-value music world, where people, you know,
switch from Spotify, to, you know, receiving boosts, and streaming sets, and so on, and they,
like, 100 extra revenue from, like, you know, one cent a year to five bucks a week or something.
It's a million extra revenue.
I guess, like, that's kind of the way it feels on us, or it's been up for a while since we've
since we've got it running, it's just... We know we have, like,
it's proof that we have something here that works, and then...
It's still a small seedling, but it actually works.
Yeah, and the next hard part is just, like, how to...
What does it actually take to onboard people?
What does it actually take to make this work?
It's like, we're developing any application or building anything.
It's like, you can get half the thing done in a night, in one good day of work,
and then it takes two, three more weeks to get the other half finished.
Yeah, the last five per cent are the hardest part,
getting all the little details right, and polishing it, and fixing all the edge cases,
and so on. That's kind of, that's where the pain is.
Yeah.
I'm not sure if my coding can fix that yet.
Pablo is trying, Pablo is trying.
It might be able to generate less bugs.
I think it's going to be a different set of bugs, right?
Yeah, yeah.
It's not going to make the same mistakes that human makes, that human makes.
It'll be interesting to see if it, like, because when you fix bugs,
you don't generally write more code, and since it's an LLM and it outputs code,
it will be interesting to see if it can fix bugs by not writing code,
like rewriting it, basically, and keeping it working.
Yeah, by coding agents, they are very good at maximizing the number of lines written
metrics. They're not very good.
Like, not a single commit that was done by my age,
but one of my agents was, like, removing code, or refactoring,
restructuring code, so that it's, like, less code.
That metrics are extremely productive.
In an actual, you know, software development team, those are the best commits,
like, something that yanks out, like, 10,000 lines.
That's what I've been doing, like, that's...
In the last two months of work on NoStrudel is just removing code.
Yeah.
I think I've removed more, like, 20% of the code base has gotten now,
eventually.
And whenever I release it, the next version will have a significantly less code in it.
But yeah, those are the best.
Yeah, we'll see how it develops.
I'm quite optimistic about it, because I think every single
part of the whole thing will get better.
Like, our understanding of where and when to use LLMs will get better.
The models themselves will get better.
The hardware will get better, which means the context winners will get bigger,
all those kind of things.
We'll have more specialized agents.
I mean, that's what Pablo is currently focusing on.
He's, like, building, like, NoStr experts, basically, that are...
I think it's, like, the dynamic, like, what Yuzuz was demoing, and we'll...
Yeah, there's, like, the dynamic...
DVMCP stuff, where it's just, like, you have a marketplace of...
In some sense, a marketplace of agents, but more than that, like,
stuff that agents can access easily, and MCP tools that agents can use.
And if you add, like, because it's all master-based,
those things automatically have identity reputation,
web of trust, so you can kind of filter out what is useful and what isn't,
that you can actually... That's the coolest part.
It's like, you can give agents money so that they can pay their own stuff.
That's, like, so amazing.
That's the coolest part about...
To your point from before, that's something that OpenAI really can't do.
No, they can't, because they won't...
An OpenAI agent, if you're running an OpenAI agent on OpenAI's platform,
it will never automatically, without authentication or anything,
it will never automatically connect to a group.
They can't do it, because they themselves have to take care of the KYC,
of the betting, of what is allowed, what isn't, what is okay,
what isn't, what is trusted, what isn't, and so on.
And Noster pushes all of that to the edges.
Noster doesn't have to do that.
There is no Noster CEO that has to do it.
You as the developer, or you as the user,
you have to figure out, okay, what are my trust-worthy sources,
what is my point of view, and so on.
And it relates back to what we said at the beginning,
where it's like the fact that you give users keys,
and the signing of the data moves the power to the edge of the network,
to the users themselves, the keyholders have the power,
not the servers anymore, the keyholders.
The user is not on the server anymore.
Exactly.
That's why, I've been seeing this interesting,
trying to rewrite, when I write Noster apps,
I'm trying to switch the verbiage, because there is no login button.
Exactly, exactly.
It's also not necessarily user accounts.
I spoke about this in the past, I think with Pablo and some other people,
but it's like, to me, what I call them is cryptographic identities,
but that's a mouthful.
But the difference between a regular platform profile
and the cryptographic identity is like,
you can create a cryptographic identity anywhere.
You can lock yourself in a bathroom and flip a coin,
and you walk out with a cryptographic identity.
So to your point, the identity, the profile, the username,
it's not on the server, it's somewhere else.
And that's what makes it so powerful.
And to the agentics stuff,
and agents have identity too, and need identity too,
and need reputation too, and all those kind of things.
That's the thing they're missing.
That's the thing they're missing on the exit.
That's why, openly, I can't do it.
Because they don't give their agents identities.
Yeah, and every agent can have an NPAP,
but with an NPAP, it also has a wallet.
But if they were doing it right in their own system,
like they would give each agent an email address.
So it could sign up for services.
Sure, but then they're boxed in.
Yeah, it's still a main problem, but like...
Which is not very useful.
But they don't even, they haven't even realized that yet.
Oh yeah, I agree, I agree.
And also most of the AI people haven't realized
that they are going to run into the problem
of web of trust reputation,
which data to trust payments and micro payments.
And you can't do micro payments on Stripe, you just can't.
You have to build up your own credit lines and so on.
You need to sign in to activate your subscription.
Yeah, not only that, first of all, you need to KYC,
but you can't do micro payments on credit drills.
You can't, you just can't, it's not feasible.
It's not economically feasible.
Because I always keep coming back to the same example.
That's why every single New York Times subscription and so on
is like, you know, at least five bucks a month.
Because everything else is not economically feasible.
You cannot settle like a fraction of a penny using Stripe,
you know, like using any credit system.
Too much overhead.
You can't, you have credit risk.
You need to know the identities of the counterparties
because credit can go bad and so on.
You can only do it with money proper,
which means you can only, on the internet,
you can only do it with Bitcoin.
Bitcoin is the only money proper we have online.
It's like, that's, that's the thing.
And that's, that's what they will need to figure out
very, very painfully as they run into these walls.
The meantime, what's cool is with the fact that we can build,
we have an open system, is that we can,
we can just buy their stuff and resell it.
Yeah.
I mean, that's what's happening with Paper Q and some other things.
Like they're building very powerful tools.
Yeah.
Google search for a while was incredibly powerful.
And like, if you don't want to go in the friction,
if you don't, if you're not in their system,
we can, we have a system now where we can just buy it and resell it.
You can basically, exactly.
You can set it free.
You can, you can put it out of the box and set it free.
That's, in some sense, that's what we are doing with our
user-generated data.
Like if you, in some sense, that's what we're doing.
If you, if you, if you're a YouTube and you have all your videos on YouTube,
you can, right now, build a script,
use a little download or whatever to download all your videos,
sign them, upload them to Blossom.
Like you can make them truly yours and you can set them free.
And it's the same thing about the agent stuff.
It's just, it's exactly the same principle.
So that's, I think, where it's heading.
But it's going to take a long time.
Like this is, this is definitely not going to happen overnight.
And it's going to take a lot of, you know, grinding away and engineering.
It's like, to me, and I mentioned this a couple of days ago, I think.
It's, it's very similar to back in the 90s where, like, Linux was
basically still a joke in some sense.
And, and, and Microsoft had like 99.9% market dominance or something ridiculous.
It was like a microsoft, absolutely everything.
And it was just a couple of nerds kind of chipping away at the problem
and building all these little tools and building everything out in the, in the
new slash Linux world.
And look where we are now.
You know, it's only a couple of decades later.
They couldn't compete.
They just too much, too much.
But that's, that's what excites me about like the DVMCP is that we're already seeing
some of it working.
Yeah.
I didn't expect it to work so quickly.
But like the ability for what excites me, I want to look more into is,
because it's, it's interesting to configure your agents to be set up for certain tasks.
Yeah.
Build your own specialist.
It's going to be interesting to see how far an agent can go starting from a blank slate
and just find a building itself with its own capabilities.
Because a lot of the like the notion of discovery when it can go out and browse
noster and make decisions like all Weber Trust, what, what can be trusted, what can't be trusted.
You give it a perspective like that.
It could start from a blank slate and you've given a task and it could just
pull in other tools, maybe in the future, other agents to complete the task and then
shut down and reset.
To me, what's magical is, is the life component of it.
It's like you're working on something and it doesn't work because it's just, it's very new.
It's a new library.
It's a new thing, whatever.
And then someone publishes a snippet and your system can automatically,
will automatically pick it up and then it works.
It's like, you know, someone just released a library or a way of doing things and so on.
And your agent is confused, like, I don't know how to use this thing.
And then he publishes almost like a little tutorial for the agent,
which is very easy to do.
That's the idea of the code snippets and then it magically works.
That's so mind-blowing and that works already.
Like, that's what we tried to show off yesterday.
I'm not sure if we managed yet, but it's very hard to explain all this.
But you see it, you see it in playing out in slower sense, like existing developer world.
Like whenever someone comes out with a new UI framework, like the newest hottest thing,
it takes a while for people to pick it up.
Because what they're waiting for is the first developers
to start writing blog posts about it, to start explaining.
Yeah, you have to understand it first.
And basically give instructions to the people who come next.
That's kind of what, yeah, now we're just doing, we're just going to try to do that with AI.
Just give it instructions.
Yeah, I mean, that's what vibe coding fixes.
You don't have to understand what it's doing or what kind of code it produces.
It's just, ah, it just works and it looks great.
Fantastic.
Do you think that's going to be an issue down the line?
I follow some really, really good coders.
And they all basically talk about how using these tools, let me give an example.
It's like, you know, you had all these taxi drivers in New York,
and they knew the city in and out, inside out.
And then GPS came along and you outsourced that part of your brain
that understands the traffic flows of the city,
that understands like even like where stuff is and so on.
And now all of that has gone out the window.
Like, you know, like, I don't know how many decades in after GPS now,
but it's like most taxi drivers of the world don't understand this stuff anymore
and just like do whatever the GPS tells them to.
And they don't have a deep understanding of how the city works,
where to drive what's what the best routes are and so on.
And so the people I follow, their main criticism is that you outsourced so many decisions
and don't really, you even outsource understanding in some sense,
like you don't even understand yourself anymore what the code base is doing.
And this will be lead to kind of terrible results down the line.
Well, you definitely limit how much like, yeah, you outsource your understanding,
you outsource some of your ability, and you probably lose it.
So you probably become by like any human measurable terms, a worse coder.
But like, whether that produces bad, I mean, that's, that's a bad outcome for yourself,
because now you're doing stuff that you don't quite understand, you're relying on the AI.
But I don't know if it produces a bad outcome for the software itself.
Yeah, the software itself or the industry, because I think it's just,
it might split into two type categories of, it might split into what we see right now,
and in some sense, like the Linux kernels and the foundational software, the low level stuff is
written by wizards. Yeah, written by wizards. And, and then a lot of the other stuff is just like,
like the JavaScript websites, all the crappy apps. Already kind of vibe together,
which is a copy paste from Stack Overflow. Yeah, the copy paste, half work.
So there's, I think there's always a level,
it probably going to end up like that, where there's the low level stuff that the AI ends up
using is, is curated, made, made with intention. And then everything on top is just kind of
regenerated, retried, retried, retried, try again, try again, until someone gets something that looks
right. Yeah, fair enough. I think that's an interesting perspective. You see with like,
it's just all slower timescale, I think. You see it with like open source, like everything gets
forward. Your point is that's already happening. Yeah, something gets fork developer goes where
someone forks in. It's like, well, let me rewrite the UI now because it doesn't look right. Let me
update it from jQuery to something else. And you're just redoing work that someone else did. And I
was now it's just become bad work. So yeah, yeah, fair enough, fair enough. Yeah, I'm not sure how
I think about this. I feel like it's kind of too early to tell. I don't know. It's with the most
surprising outcome for me was that LLMs, especially if you actually speak to them, not type to them
or write to them, but speak to them, they make excellent Robodock debuggers, excellent kind of
brainstorming partners. It's really interesting. I never expect, I would have never expected them.
The output, the output side is so kind of up in the air. We don't really know how much is
capable on the output side, but the input side, the fact that we managed to make something that
kind of appears to understand like human language. Yeah. Like that is absolutely amazing. And that's
that's a massive because I remember working with some of that, like the early, like, you know,
like Siri on the original Siri version on the iPhone and all the AI assistants were released
after that. That's very, very new stuff. I worked with Dragon, naturally speaking,
which was basically you had to train it yourself by speaking like a book of text into the microphone
for like a week so that it understands your voice and how you say things. But like even when it
managed to convert the, even when we managed to convert the audio to text, because we had
that for a while. It worked for a while, yeah. You could tell it was just running a bunch of
statements. Yeah, sure. It was like hard coded to like certain tasks. Yeah, a lot of times
are different beasts. Yeah. And somehow it's like that is fixed almost overnight.
Because that's what I'm excited as we get like, I guess you could say the next generation of
models when they release is the whole MCP, like the tool call and capabilities. And we start getting
small models with that, the lightweight ones, then the ones that realistically can't reason
very well, can't come up with like, you can, you can use them almost as like a fuzzy layer
between like human language and calling API. Yeah, I mean, that's, I think that's what also,
in some sense, as I watch people using all this stuff, like extensively, and I use it myself as
well, it's like, I see a lot of people, for example, and, and Justin talked about this as well, it's
like, okay, it's a fantastic interface between you and your terminal, because you cannot remember,
you cannot remember, like the humans are very bad at remembering every single kind of flag of,
you know, FFmpeg or Git, or whatever command, you know, it's like, how, I know what I want to do,
but I can't do the mapping myself of what I want to do to exactly the, what are the right brackets
and the right flags and the right, whatever. That's what I mean by like, it's like, it's a human
interface for calling, yeah, it's really good at that. Yeah. And like, that's like,
I'm excited to get home and start like building some hardware and putting some experiments together
for this, because like, that is the piece that was missing, um, in like, home assistant style
AI. Oh, okay. So turn on my light. Yeah. It doesn't know which light. Yeah. If statement can't tell.
And now you can do it locally. Well, if you know, you can do it without inviting all the spies
into your living room. If you have two components in like a smart home, if you have a user location,
which can be detected, like with your own, by like motion or something. And then you have a light
bulb. Previously, you'd have to write an if statement saying look for a light bulb that's in the user
location. If they say this coming now, the AI can just kind of, for lack of a better word, just like
fuzz it, just kind of. Yeah. It won't figure it out on its own. It'll figure it out. Yeah. It will
figure out what you mean. That's like, that's just what's so fascinating. It's, it's gonna fail.
But it's like the 90% solution that actually works. Exactly. It doesn't matter that it's like,
I've just been working with a junior engineer to kind of basically use an LLM for like a
summarization task, those kind of things. And he was like, ah, yeah. He was like, I think I got
a working and so on. But it's like, he produces a different output every time I want to fix that
and so on. It's like, okay, well, yeah, well, that's, that's the whole point. Like you don't try to
fix that. Like that's gonna happen with LLM's always. And that's the point. That's why they are
as a good. That's why they work. It's why they work. They work for problems. They're not if
statements. Yeah. There's there's problems that are like extremely complicated, like parsing a
command out of human speech that they work for 90% of the time. Yeah, which is, and that's the
difference between natural language and computer language. Because natural, natural language is
always, it always leaves this wiggle room for, for interpretation. That's why it's so hard to do.
And you have to, you need the context to do the, to get the interpretation, right? And so it is
always, it will never be 100% never, like only computer language and math can do that, basically.
And that's the main difference. And so what we have now is a great translation layer, basically,
because what, what LLM's obviously are good at is actually they, they can read the whole man
page of FM FM packet. They usually are not going to make a mistake with like the bracket is in the
wrong spot or whatever, you know, like those kinds of things. That's an interesting point. Yeah.
It's the whole point of natural language is, is that it is fuzzy. Yeah. It is, and it has to be
because the world is fuzzy. Future is uncertain that you can't have perfect knowledge of the world
and all those kinds of things. You're just like one, you are part of the universe in the world.
It's impossible for you to have a perfect section. There's another bit of entropy we added, we
managed to add to the computer. Like you needed that entropy in the system for it to be able to
act like something that's in the real world. I think it's a necessary part to have a proper
interface between humans and computers in some sense. It is the Star Trek kind of, you just
talk to the computer kind of thing. Should we do, should we do one more, one more round of the,
before we hit like the waterfalls and the waves? Yeah.
But yeah, that's how I see it. It's like, and what to me, to me, it's always important to really
have a hand, get a hands-on feeling for this stuff and really play around with it for a long time
because most people I think they don't understand. I mean, who understands these things, you know,
it's like quantum mechanics. It's like, you know, who truly understands this stuff. But
even the engineers building their own black boxes, no one understands how they actually
reason how they work. We're very bad at inspecting them. We're very bad at figuring out what they
do inside, basically. That was my initial thought about it way back from a long time ago, of course,
when it came out. But it was like, I thought that they would be more useful once we understood
them more. But the fact that it's the fuzziness of it that actually makes it useful,
they almost work better when we specialize them. There's people who understand them how they work.
And they're probably not very complicated. But it's, you know, how it actually produces the
outcome it produces is, you can't comprehend, you can't realistically.
But I would disagree that there's people that understand how they work. It's very much like,
okay, physicists understand in a perfect scenario how particles behave. But no, physicists understand
the weather of the earth. That's what I mean. It's too much. It's too big. You can't understand it.
And you can't even build systems to help you understand it, because it's just too much.
You'll run into combinatorial explosion and basically the computer that's trying to
compute it's going to collapse into black hole. You don't have enough context. Too many states.
Yeah. And it's also, I don't think, I also don't think that, I mean, right now,
like, I don't understand how you work. I don't understand how you think, you know,
like, I don't understand how my team works. I don't understand how whatever, even my life works,
you know. That's an interesting, that's like, you have to, you still, like, I don't want to
call my wife useful, you know, like, that's not what I mean. That's not what I'm trying to say
at all. But you still find ways to work together. And you still, you know, are able to divvy up
tasks. You find a common interface. Yeah. And you don't have to understand the other completely
to, you know, it's the common interface. Like you said, that's what language is. It's a common,
it's a fuzzy enough common interface that I can say something. And 90% of the time, you'll understand
what I'm saying. We feel a lot of work. I mean, we have to learn the same language and so on.
It's learning the same complex. It's incredibly inefficient because I have to process my thoughts,
which are, you know, you have to turn what's in your head, it's worse. Yeah. That's a compression
algorithm. It's very bad. It's expensive. It's an expensive algorithm. But it's the only way we
found to, like, transfer anything. Because if I, if I transfer my thoughts to you, they'd be
completely incompatible. It's probably gonna, you know, my brain would probably melt.
Yeah. It's just two incompatible systems. It's like, it's like one computer system trying to
transfer, you know, it's database to another. It's like, yeah, if the database is lined up
perfectly, if they're like genetic copies of each other, you can transfer the data. You can move,
you can't even move data from a WordPress website to a WordPress website. Yeah. It's like,
almost like genetically different. Yeah, yeah. Everyone has a different sequel version or
something. And it's just everything breaks. Yeah. Yeah. And so like you need to just come with like,
it's like processed export language. So the matrix, like, I know Kung Fu, Kung Fu download
is a lie that will never work. Probably. Probably. Well, there's a lot of stuff that the matrix has
that aren't lies. That isn't a lie. A matrix is great. It's basically, you know, it's, it's,
it's Plato's cave just for the new, the new, actually, I watched it with a bunch of friends at the
Bitcoin having. You never saw it before? Not in its not entirety. Okay, it's kind of, I knew the
story and I'd seen clips of it, but I watched it like front to back. And that was, that was a
great movie. It's one of the best movies of my time. There's so much, I have never seen a movie
with so much, like, in the context of computers, I've never seen something that says so much symbolism.
Yeah. Like there's, almost every scene, there's something that relates to like,
computers or social media or something. You're, you're seeing play out right now.
And it came out in 1999, which is insane.
In 1999. It was when it came out. So it was filmed, like, you know, 97, 98. It's a, it's a, you know,
massive, culturally important movie and, and like a classic now for, for reason, you know.
It's just true. It was also the age difference between us. It's like, for me, it's like, I,
oh yeah, right. Okay. It's like, there's people that haven't seen Matrix did too.
I find that there's like a, I have a backlog of movies that people tell me. And like,
everyone like, have you seen this? Like, it's like a classic movie or something. Yeah.
I'm like, I try to just remember, and then they say the release date. I'm like, oh yeah,
I haven't seen that. Yeah. It came out before I was born.
But I'm in the same situation. And I, I, you know, I, I, I, I try to work through the backlog. And I,
I'm, I would say like 50% through or so. But it's like, I'm in the same situation,
which is people that are 10, 20, 30 years older than me. They will mention like, you know,
Soyland green or something or like sci-fi movies. Yeah, it's fantastic. Yeah.
It's fantastic. Soyland green is made of people. No, it's, it's great. And like all, you know,
space, obviously. Yeah. And, and all that. I just very recently watched Close Encounters of the
Third Kind. And like all these classic science fiction movies, I still have to watch the,
it's one with Keanu Reeves that I haven't seen yet. What's, because it goes around
an Oscar from time to time. Johnny, Johnny, mammonic. I never heard that.
And I just really want to watch it because it has the word mammonic in it. Like,
sea phrase. Yeah. Yeah. And it's about the data. Like he, he basically, he stores data in his brain,
like Mary, I propose to what we were talking about. And he's like a data career and the data is
somehow too important and almost fries his brain or something. Why, why are the stories back in so
interesting? Yeah, I mean, it was interesting times when, when computer and computing and this
stuff came around, it was very interesting times. Now it's kind of embedded in society and so on.
But the internet really was a very new world and a very foreign thing, you know, like the information
super highway and no, no, no, no one understood it at all. I think we're in a similar spot now.
Yeah. Especially with other lamps. Like it's a, no, we are, it's a similar shift.
Do you think, so the two things we're seeing right now, like the, we're sort of like the kind of
noster starting up the concept of cryptographic key pairs as identities. And then the
AI and large language models becoming a thing. Because both of those things, like they're there.
It's happening at the same time. It's a very interesting coincidence because I don't believe in
coincidence. Well, I couldn't be related in any way because the large language models are
systematically destroying the centralized providers because they can't do anything against spam.
Yeah. Because their systems are set up to block spam from a computer that has like always a
recognizable pattern. But the spam, when you, when you, when one person runs like 10 Instagram
accounts is that it can't detect that as spam anymore. The spam protection is also not something
you can, you can perfectly solve like one man's, one man's trash is another man's treasure, you
know, like that's the problem. And like, and but like this is happening at the same time that we
have a growing solution for cryptographic identity. So it's like, it's pushing on one side. It's
interesting. It's a coincidence that makes me wonder why it's happening at the same time.
I think it was Applebaum or was it the Sange? I'm not sure. But but he's like, for some reason,
the universe smiles on encryption. Like it doesn't have to work this way. But it does work this way
that encryption cryptography itself gives like it moves all the power to the individual. And
it's a very peculiar thing because there's no reason why the universe should work in that way
or has to work in that way. But it's basically like the US, China and Russia can't conspire
against you. If you use strong cryptography, there's nothing they can do. Yeah. Yeah. Like to access
to open the box to access the data. And and and now in the, you know, AI, LLM world and all those
kinds of things, it's like the Skynet being the most probable outcome, like the Terminator style.
Skynet, have you seen Terminator? The original Terminator? Yes. Okay. Yes.
Where robots take over the world, everyone dies and it's like, it's really bad. I think it's very
unlikely. It's a very unlikely outcome because the closed system can't compete. Yes. Somehow,
the universe smiles on open source software and open data and cryptographically signed and verified
data, which is out in the open. Yeah. It does not smile. Like in this scenario, the universe does
not smile on up on silos, you know, and siloed systems and silo software and so on. It's very
much like it's probably not. We talked about this a little bit, but it's like, there's a reason why
totalitarian societies and can't deal with compounding errors. And you need outside force to prop up
the silo. Yeah. Yeah. And so a jungle or like a market-style system, like a marketplace,
an open market, which is jungle-like system, doesn't need an outside force. Yeah. So if you
have an open self-stabilizing system, it's always superior to a close, it has to be enforced from
the outside system because you need energy, you need energy from the outside to stabilize the system.
Yeah. You need that. That's the general principle. Yeah. So and this upkeep and this applying force
on it and so on has a cost. And so it will bankrupt you on a long enough time frame.
Yeah. Yeah. It's it's. That's how I see it, at least. You know, like maybe I'm also full of
shit, but it's like history kind of shows. There's something fundamental there because I think if
you look at a lot of if you look at a lot of systems, if you look at nature and whatnot,
a surface level understanding, like successful outcomes continue whatever is can be whatever is
happening. Errors compound. Yeah. And it that seems to be a fundamental thing where in every
system, you see it a lot in computer systems where the successful operation of a task
will just produce the outcome. But if you introduce 1% air, it can't correct. Like there's very
huge styles of systems that have air correction. Yeah. Yeah. And the reason it's so necessary is
because 1% then 1 more percent, then 1 more percent, then 1 more percent, and 1 more. And
successes don't correct in the opposite direction in almost all cases. So like the good example of
this is like, you try to, I mean, everyone has like their parents or their friends computer,
and you try to explain to them why it's going slow. Like, you know, we probably know why it's
slow. It's like too much is installed, there's too much extensions, there's a program running,
100 programs running in the background. But like, it's so many little 1% air,
they're like all compound, and the system doesn't have any way of correcting that because it's just
one more little thing, one more little, and so it just naturally basically falls apart and becomes
slow. That's an interesting point. It's like the, I talked about this a bunch in the Bitcoin
context, also in the cluster context. The reason why signing data sets the data free is because
computers are insanely good at creating perfect copies. Yeah. So, and DNA is also good at that.
That's the other system that's really good at it. But DNA makes certain mistakes. That's why we
have mutations and so on, like not all mistakes are catastrophic, some are beneficial. But, but
the thing about binary encoding and about computers is they're perfect copying machines. And
because we have perfect copying machines, look at that. Transporting something. Well, like
helicopters and everything. Oh, that's probably, that's probably like something's burning.
Because that's a, that's a big bucket of water.
It's like empty though. Yeah, probably. There's no way about the water flies behind a helicopter.
Yeah, that's true. Well, hopefully it's just like a little exercise thrill or whatever. But the,
the thing about being able to copy something perfectly is like it has very interesting side
effects. So, you can't, you can't create perfect copies in the real world. You just can't. It's like,
it doesn't matter if you look at cloning, it doesn't matter if you're copying it artwork,
it doesn't matter if you look at mass production, whatever of like, you know, Ikea chairs, who cares.
It's like, every little thing is going to be a little bit different. You don't have, you only
have arrow, like perfect copies, you only have an additional world where you're dealing with bits
of information and you can run arrow correction algorithms and so on and so forth. And so the
upside is we can't build systems like Bitcoin, we can't build systems like Nostra, the, the, the,
that's kind of, you know, like, that are insanely resilient because the same thing,
exactly the same thing is in multiple places at once, basically, because you cannot, you cannot
differentiate between a JPEG, like two JPEGs that are exactly the same have the same hash and
everything. What's the original? You can't know. Yeah, we've, we've successfully, as far as
information goes in that context, we've successfully solved the, um, location problem. Exactly. Exactly.
That's why I was about to say that next. That's why it becomes non-local. And that's why Bitcoin
is not local. And that's why Nostra stuff is not local. That's why we are able to also,
that's why cryptographic identities are non-local. That's why we can remove stuff from the service.
Yeah. That is what makes stuff non-local. Yeah. That's exactly it. That's exactly it. It is,
it is because you guarantee a perfect copy and therefore not only it ceases to become a copy in
that other location. It's not a copy anymore. No, it's the same thing. It's exactly. Exactly. Yeah. Exactly.
That's where the non-locality comes in. Which is really weird, right? It's, we don't, we don't
have this concept in a real world. There's no parallel. No, there's no parallel. I mean, only
quantum stuff. Let's not talk about that. But my point is, it's like because of the perfect
copies, that's what brings all these beautiful properties to, to, to the systems we care about,
to Bitcoin, to Nostra, to blossom as well. It's the same thing. It's the same principle. It's like,
it's exactly the same file. We can guarantee it. And so which one is the original is a meaningless
question. It's all the same thing. It's all the same thing. They're all the original. Yeah. For all,
you cannot know in a truly distributed system, you literally cannot know. You absolutely cannot know.
And so, where I was going with this is like the downside of that. The downside, it relates to what
you said, the fuzzing of the things and so on. It's like the downside of that with the LLMs and
all these things is like, you don't necessarily want to have perfect copies all the time. There's
a reason why we forget things, for example. Yes. Yes. You need very useful to forget things. Perfect
memory would be a curse. Another blessing. Yeah. You'd fill up too much. You'd have too much
because information becomes irrelevant. Your context changes, your environment changes,
and you need to get rid of things. Exactly. Exactly. Yeah. And I think that's also where open
systems are superior, where you have a certain way of figuring out what's relevant now,
what's kind of relevant in the channel based on, you know, your point of view,
based on the most recent stuff that just happened and so on. And that's very hard to do in close
systems. Well, you usually have to make a decision of what to forget. Exactly. Which is energy.
Exactly. Yeah. You can't. That's the important point. The point is you cannot centrally control
that. It has to be an organic emerging thing. You lose, it's a losing game because if you have to
spend energy to forget, then you've just doubled the amount of energy you need. Forgetting needs
to be effortless. Which means you can't like, like, every, like, every life form is optimized
to get it just as much energy as it needs. And if it needs extra and double energy just to
just make it so steady. Forgetting and dying needs to be effortless. Yes. And it usually is.
Yeah. But in a centrally controlled system, it is not. It's not. You need to prune the database.
Exactly. Which is a task you have to run. You have to do all these checks to make sure you're not
forgetting something that's important. Yeah. And that's why I'm so bullish on
Nusser. It's a substrate for all this stuff because it happens organically. It naturally forgets
the relays go down. Exactly. Things get deleted. If you don't care about data anymore, it's just
like whatever. That's why, like, that is one of the, everyone loves bringing it up around,
bringing it up every time. But that is one of the reasons that IPFS and those style of systems
couldn't work is they strive to not forget anything. Yeah. Yeah, yeah, yeah. It had
IPFS was aiming for the curse of perfect knowledge. Yeah. Yeah. The curse of perfect knowledge.
Yeah. That's the good way of putting it. Yeah. And they also tried to build a global state and,
you know, they made some assumptions which I think was very misguided like they. And they made
yeah, I mean, they launched a massive ship. Good for them. I watched. I watched. I was in the IPFS.
I was watching and very interesting. I was very enthusiastic about it. And they had like building
things that were developing clients. They were making new nodes. Shipcoin launched. The amount
of commits on the project like dropped in a half. Yeah, yeah. They just stopped shipping. Yeah.
Yeah. I mean, that's the, that's also the thing about money. It's not always a good thing. Like
it's oftentimes, it oftentimes corrupts. And, you know, like just throwing endless money at
the problem doesn't necessarily always fix it, which is interesting actually. Like it's, you know,
you sometimes it even makes stuff worse. So that's like case in point IPFS and quite a few other
projects as well. But yeah, I mean, IPFS tried to, like it leaned heavily into deduplication,
for example. That's why that's why I love loss them so much with exactly you need to,
because then you need to fit the pieces together again. And that's like all of that is computationally
expensive, actually hard. If you're missing a shard, what do you do, those kind of things. Yeah.
And like the left side of the brain solution that is both like, it's all to me, it's all kind of
left side of the brain, Bitcoin, Noster and Blossom as well, where it's just like, okay, we just have
this file, we only, we, you know, like, that's the file. That's the hash. That's it.
It's the previous point, like using energy to forget. It's also like, that's why Bitcoin got
right. So fundamentally right is it minimize the amount of energy needed to verify down to
something almost nothing measurable in the system. Because if you, that's more energy that needs
to be put into the system, if you're spending more to verify. You, yeah, you immediately see
that it, that the new information you get is proper, is valid and proper. You only need to,
that the block header basically. Yeah, it's, it's the end, it makes it very, very cheap to figure
out what to dismiss. Yeah. Very cheap, like almost free. The main, the main thing is to fix the
spam price. Yeah, yeah. And, and, and Bitcoin really has to figure it out because Bitcoin is
truly about building up something that doesn't forget forever. So you really have to get this
part right. It's interesting that it's necessary in some way. One piece. Yeah, those are fundamental
things. And I briefly, and we spoke about this yesterday as well, I briefly spoke with Pablo
about this. It's like, there are these certain ways that the universe works and you can't cheat
that. And on the LLM side, for example, and it is about this stuff. It's like, if you want to, if you
want to, if you want to artificially build something, if something doesn't emerge organically, if you
want to, like, you know, if you, if you, if you have a structure that needs upkeep, it sucks energy
out of the whole system. Yeah. So on a long enough time scale, it will just fall in crumble. Yeah,
because you can't, yeah, but you can't have, you can't have endless energy, energy input forever.
So, so only things that organically emerge, that's, that's the constant, basically, you know, like,
that's the thing that can always happen. Spontaneous order, like crystalline structures forming,
whatever it would have you, you know, those kind of things. And on the kind of information
processing side, what I think is so interesting, I mean, we went through the whole how our computer
language is different from that natural language is how it's compute different from like thinking
in some sense and so on. And now on the LLM side, that being a generalist and being a specialist
are in tension with each other. You can't be both. And what I see emerging right now is like, if you,
the specialists still need to communicate, they still need to have a shared language,
where, of course, you know, like the model context protocol comes in, DVMCP, all these things come in,
but you need to provide the shared substrate for the marketplaces and for those all of all,
for those kind of things. And to me, like, noster is absolutely perfect for that. And so I see,
I see noster as the breeding ground for specialists in some sense. Like, generalists will have as well,
but, but in terms of, in terms of housing and training specialist system specialist, LLM
specialist agents, I think noster is perfect. I don't think as of right now, we have a better
substrate. Yeah, it's a bold claim, I realize, but I believe it's true. I need to think about
the whole concept of like training the, training the agents, because that's everything I've,
I've only brushed up against them and like using them and trying to use them like specialized
tasks. I have not seen what's possible, like, training them and specialized. I know you can do
it. Do I wonder what, what, what would you want to, what kind of agent would you want to build
and what do you want to train it on? I don't know yet. That's a thing. Do you have a lot of personal
data that you want to feed it? You want to build a LLM version of hazard? Well, see, I don't, I think
like a database use case is the only use case I can think of like a specialized system. But
that's because we've had them forever. We've had, you know, like SQL databases. We've had those
for a long time and those are like a server that's been trained to retrieve data and sort it and
stuff like that, which the LLM, you know, we've seen that with like rag databases and various
and there's stuff that I haven't looked into yet. It's really good at like data retrieval.
So you, you would like to have a second brain in some sense?
Definitely. That's one I try to build. But I wonder if there's like other use cases that we just
haven't, that aren't possible because they can't be built in a perfect way that the computers require.
Because like data retrieval is data archiving and data retrieval, if you put enough effort into
it is a solved problem. You can get it 100% right. Yeah. But there's, what if there's other systems
like specialized systems, you know, the concept like training and AI that you can't, we can't do
right now because we can't get them 100% right. I don't know. So it's just gonna be one of your
next side projects, get home, buy a bunch of graphics cards. I'm gonna see what I can run
with the hardware I have now. It's amazing what you can run. Like I, I, I keep being blown away,
but like, you know, my old thinkpad can run the old armour with llama too. And it's very useful.
It's like completely local open source model. That's the beauty of, that's what I was waiting
for to get jump into AI was to see that like something running locally can't, you still can't
make decisions. It can't run a whole pipeline. And, and you can't, it's pretty dumb when you
interact with it. Yeah. Like like doing tasks. It's smart enough to be useful. Yeah. That's kind
of interesting, an interesting threshold to cross. Yes, because it definitely wasn't that way
a year ago. Yeah. I, I, from what I tested, it was slow, didn't understand a single thing,
merely understood English. And now it's like to the point of being useful and it's, it's improving.
Yeah. I think that the, the running is like the, the local part is absolutely key. Because on the,
on the, especially on the desktop, like it's, we discussed this at length the last couple of weeks,
but it's like the, the, the beauty of noster, the beauty of all these systems is that you don't need
an API key ever. Well, it's like, and, and so in this world, like if you would only, if, if I mean,
yes, okay, there's this wrappers and so on, like pay per queue and so on. But, but in the best case,
it's like, this, all the stuff runs locally on the, on your computer. We have that way back
a little while ago was like, how else are you going to trust it? Yes. You can't see it's working.
Like locally, I can see every piece working. If it's running on open AI servers, if it's running
on someone else's servers, it becomes a trust me of our situation. Like, yeah, you're not in
charge. And the whole point, the whole point of the world we're trying to build is to put the
users in charge. Yeah. But like, if I'm going to build a, like a personal assistant or something
that's just going to voice commands, one stuff when we do stuff, DM people for me, send emails.
Like, unless I can absolutely see that the system is working and I can trust it almost completely,
it will never work. I mean, you can contain it yourself. Like it can be just don't have access
to it and be on your local network, you know, and you, you see everything that comes in and out.
Yeah. Yeah. But like, that's, that's the important part. You see,
you see it, there's something there like, if you can see it working, you can trust it a lot more
than like, talk to see it more. Of course, you trust a lot more. The other, the other way is like,
you know, Siri or whatever has access to all your DMS, all your emails, all your, your whole phone,
all your screen at all times and all those kinds of things. And of course, it's sending stuff to
a server. How can you trust it? It's impossible to trust it. You shouldn't trust it at all. Like,
you shouldn't trust it by default. Yeah. But in the local first world, it's very different.
It doesn't let you adapt to it either. Because if you say the wrong thing, Siri, and it calls
the wrong person, you don't know if it was Siri making a mistake or whether you said the wrong thing.
But if you see, oh, yeah, you don't know how it works. Sure, sure. Then you can, oh, I mean,
that's part of trust, right? It's like, you, you, you, if you can't trust the thing, it won't betray
you. But if you can't trust the thing and it portrays you, you don't even know what happened.
Yeah. You know what I mean? It's like, it's, it's unknown. Yeah. Yeah, yeah. No, but it's, it's like,
I, I still, I'm still surprised that other communities didn't stumble into Noster
and found it useful enough to, to go kind of very hard on it. There is a, I talked with Pablo
about this like a couple of weeks ago. And there's the local first community, for example, like,
at the self-hosting community and so on, lots of hacker community and so on. Like,
Noster is kind of by design local first in some sense, you know, it's like you said with the
community relay and so on. You can run your own home relay, do everything there. You can use Noster
as a substrate. And, and it works beautifully. It's very, very useful for this kind of stuff.
And, and I'm, I'm, because there is all these people that have the same concerns and they,
they shared the exact concern that you just mentioned with like, I, I never want to send
stuff to a server I don't control ever and so on. And, and they are not, they, they didn't,
I don't know. I, I don't know. Like, maybe it's just time. Maybe it's just like you mentioned with it.
You know, new, new UI framework and someone needs to write a blog post about it that other people
understand and so on. But, but it's, yeah, I'm, I'm still surprised that we don't have
more influx from, from other people. I mean, Bitcoin doesn't help. It's like you, you,
you go on Noster and it's like all Bitcoin people talking to Bitcoin stuff and everyone hates Bitcoin.
It's like, from the followers to the exact reason.
I was starting to agree with you like the care, removing the character when it was a mistake,
because the amount of philosophical posts that I have no interest in is growing. It's like, it's,
I, I, we should be short. There was the whole point. Yeah. It's like, we have to bring back the
character limit. Two hundred ten characters. Nothing more. Yeah.
Just think about it. Yeah. Idea is different ways of browsing. That's the beauty of it.
I was like, if I want that back, I can just make it. Yeah. You just filter things out. You don't
see it. I mean, there is, there is the, I think there are some relays that only accept
events that are hundred, 144 characters or shorter or something like that. Like, because I talked
with Pablo about it that he configured one of the relays like this and some other people cloned it.
So, you know, there, there are inklings of the revolution, but it's not,
we're, we're not even, there's not even dozens of ads as yet. I think most people enjoy the long
tweets and long, you know, most posts and so on. It's, and again, like I'm, you know,
I'm a huge fan of blog posts and articles and so on, but it's a different thing. It's a different
media type in my mind. I think like tweets should be short. Whatever is in a feed should be short.
I don't want to see like 5,000 word essay in my feet. No, but you're laughing, you're laughing,
but that's what we built now. Yeah. It's what everyone built. It's like, it really sucks. Yeah,
it's completely wrong. Like, that's why I think of changing it because I literally don't read
anything. If it's two paragraphs, you're in a different mode. You're in a different mode. Like,
if you're, if you're in a feed, you're in a browsing mode. Yeah, you're in a browsing and
discovery mode. If I find an article and it's both posted by someone that I, that I, that I trust
with their opinion on long form stuff, you know, like, like this person only shares interesting
stuff. I am going to put it into my, I'm going to read this later pile. And when I'm in the reading
mode, then I'm going to read it. And I have my apps and my things and my lists and so on that
I go through. But you mentioned like scrolling down, like the, the large amounts of text is
to put it. It's straight in terms. It's like, it's like dumping a large, it's, it's just expensive.
Yeah. It's like putting a large amount of input into a LLM. Yeah. The amount of
just the cost and the processing power to reduce that down and understand it.
It's a, it's a DDoS on your attention, basically. Yeah. Yeah. It's, it's, it was a big mistake. I,
yeah. I'm, I'm, I'm, I'm great. I'm glad you're converting. You know, it's like, I'm, I'm, if I
have to convert every single client developer one by one, I'm going to do that. We can enforce it
for sure. I mean, that's what, that's what the clients do. They hide like the read more by now.
Yeah. It's too long. You have read more. Yeah. But then that doesn't really even fix the problem
because it fixes the problem with the scrolling, but then the person who's making that article
never gets any engagement. Yeah. Because the first sentence that everyone reads doesn't convey any
meaning. Yeah. And if it would ever catch on that people would game it and would, would make the
first sentence really like, you know, like, click bait, basically. Yeah. Click bait, video header,
titles, all that stuff like that. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. No. Tweets were perfect. It's like,
I never used them. I don't know. Everyone fucked everything up, man. It's like, because the
downfall was the Twitter removed the character limit. Like they made it twice as long. And then
they removed it completely. And yeah, I thought it was always the same. No, no, no. No, it was,
I think, I think it was 140 or something at first. And then 280, I think. And then they, they removed
it completely and so on. And it's like, it wasn't an issue. Like it, I really think it wasn't an
issue. Well, that's, that's where the whole concept of threads came out. And I'm not mistaken,
because we had to make your first post compelling to the point, almost like a title. And then you
would go on more. And I think threads, I still think I have this long thing on threads. I, I, you
know, I don't, I don't, I went on and on about this for many months. I gotta stop. Gave up a little
bit. But threats were ingenious, because, because you could, you could link them together. You could
still, it was kind of like a read more thing, right? Yeah. And, but also, like you could react to
every single paragraph almost, like to every single, you, in a tweet, you could fit two sentences,
maybe, you know? Yeah. And so, so, so you, you could also kind of see what people found most
interesting in this, like little wall effects in the thread, you know? And it was, it was very
good. It was very, very useful. Interesting. And it grew organically. That's the thing, like it grew
like this over time. And it all had its use. And, and now all of that is destroyed, basically.
In some way, like, like median and the way they do like, like the highlighter idea, like,
highlighting, kind of recaptures that, because you can visualize what points do people talk about,
highlight, share and stuff like that. And threats was a very organic thing. Yes. Around that.
Because there was some banger statement and that was like reposted and everything and like
lots of reactions to it and stuff. I want, I want to, one of these days, I'm going to like
some sort of client like highlight, some sort of client like highlighter because
the idea is still good. It's just another, it's like another app on my backlog, where it's like,
I want to see it work. Justin is, Justin is hopefully going to
build out his Rust multiplatform. And then, you know, we can just like one-shot native apps that
do exactly that. That would be my goal. That's an interesting point with AI and whatnot,
is the people who, like the Rust multiplatform idea, the people who build like foundational
systems, they usually, I mean, I kind of consider myself in this category too,
because I get so distracted by building a beautiful library, a beautiful toolbox,
that I never actually go build anything afterwards. When I do it's not as much as I should. It's like
maybe the equivalent will be like someone who designs an amazing workshop and they get,
they just enjoy designing a workshop so much that they forget to build anything else.
But the AI having the setting up your development environment for like two months and never writing
a line of code. Yeah, but that's the best, like the one shot in like a vibe coding idea is interesting
because we've kind of, that like does two things, it almost standardizes work. It makes it less
important whether it's your workshop or someone else's. And then it lowers the amount of effort
it takes to just use it. So like, it's like Rust multiplatform. He could build it out to be like
an amazing app framework. And then he doesn't even have to build any apps for it. If it just,
I could come along and just prompt an app into existence and use the foundation that he lay in.
Yeah, yeah. I mean, in some sense, and Pablo made this point also, in some sense, that's what high
level programming languages are. It's like, I mean, everything, you know, boils down to
to assembler and binary after that, you know, and it's like everything else on top is scaffolding
for us to have an easier time. I think that's what we were talking about earlier with like
Bill AI and vibe coding mess stuff up. And I don't think it will because of that reason,
because we'll still have to build really good solid foundations. Yeah. And then the
the process of like using those workshops, using those foundations is always going to be like
almost general game, like, like build a chair and it's done. It's not perfect. It's good enough.
Like, this actually brings up an interesting point that I was talking to
as like, soft engineers, we, there's a weird tendency, it might be from the computer to think
of stuff we build as global solutions. And like, we don't think of most of the time when we're
talking like apps we build or tools we make. Yeah, that's the current paradigm. Millions of users.
Yeah, we never think of like a bespoke solution. Like, if you think the traditional,
this might be due to the fact that you mentioned like perfect copies and all that, but
you can't like, you don't have the traditional sense of like a woodworking shop like,
yeah, make one chair. Yeah, you might make them all look like each other. Yeah, or try to. Yeah,
I think I think you're right. I think we will have more of that very specialized, highly opinionated
stuff just because it's easy to build. And if just like 3,000 people use it, that's fine.
Well, you see it with websites all the time. Yeah. Well, like the original websites that they
were all bespoke, they were all, they were all just as much as needed to have a website for that
person. Yeah. And then for the last five years, we've been trying to solve like website building
with like extremely generic frameworks. Yeah, I would even say like 15 years or so.
Yeah. Before I was in web development. And it, it, it just keeps getting bigger and bigger and
bigger and bigger. Yeah. But the, like, yeah, I mean, the ultimate outcome of this is like the
Facebook page where it's just everything looks the same. Yes. And you set the profile fiction.
It's just a configure a few things in the massive system. Yeah. But that's one thing I'm looking
forward to a lot with AI models is the ability to build those like one-off websites that are
just as big as they need to be. Yeah. And also one-off apps and just one-off whatever in some
sense. I've been doing that a lot. I've built a lot of kind of little scripts and little things
that I would have never sat down and build otherwise. I'm looking forward to it for like
friends and whatnot. Because you always have friends who ask you to build apps, build websites
and all that. Now you can. You can charge them. Oh, yeah, that's true. But there's some fun
parties like they don't know yet. Well, it still takes expertise. But just like the fact that I
could build a, because it used to take a lot of work to make a little web app, a website that was
just what was needed without using a framework because it's easier with framework speed people
up. But now you can do a generous single page of HTML looks how you want. Yeah. Ship it done.
Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. We'll see. We'll see. I mean, I like I like your insight about kind of we're
already in this situation with, you know, the wizards working on whether it's the Unix kernel
or Bitcoin core or what have you, you know, like you really need to know what you're doing. You
need to understand the whole thing. You're not just, you know, like copy-pasting a couple lines of
JavaScript from Stack Overflow and so on. And that's a very interesting perspective of kind of,
we're already in this world. It's just like, you've seen it with, um, multiplied now. You've
seen the JavaScript ecosystem. Oh, yeah. Changes for a while. Like early days, it was everyone had
to build their own framework. It was, it was, it was hard. And then people who, the engineers who
really thought through things who, I mean, React came around through it. They, they were really
intentioned about building a foundational level for a UI framework. Yeah. And then after everything,
then we just kind of shifted layers. Now we don't write a lot of apps don't write. Yeah.
Pure JavaScript and more, they write on top of a framework. Yeah. I think, I think it's a safe
prediction to make that we will have frameworks for LLMs just like that. There'll be languages and
that's, that's what's already being built now. And that's also what we are trying to build on
an OSTA side with DB MCP and some of the things that Pablo built with the code snippets and kind
of having it basically have a, have a very tight integration of your IDE, of the agents it has access
to, of the MCP tools that you grab from Noster and infusing it with kind of your point of view,
which means also your web of trust is like, because I'm, you know, if, if Pablo publishes
and signs something, I'm going to grab it and like, let it run wild on my system. Like, I don't
care. I don't care. That's enough trust for me. I have a dedicated mic computer. So it's fine.
If it implodes, you know, I don't trust Pablo completely, but, but you got what I mean, you know,
and that's what we are trying to build out. And I think we'll have a myriad of those kind of,
let's call this a framework. It is kind of a framework of how to work with LLMs in some sense.
And the goal on our side is to build more freedom tech. The goal for us is to, you know,
one shot, Noster clients, one shot. I mean, one guy basically byte coded a very sophisticated
Bitcoin wallet, you know, where it's like, okay, it uses Bitcoin script and everything is like,
I'm never going to use it and trust it, but you can do that too. And we saw, you know,
Kali and some other people like, you know, by code, cash, your clients and all those kind of things.
So, so that's what we are aiming at, where it's just like, we want to give agents the tools and
the understanding, like how to do this right. And then they're never going to make these sets
of mistakes. Again, they're just going to be able to watch on it. Like, that's how you do,
that's how you fetch data from relays. That's how you build a feed. That's how you get a profile.
The cool thing is, there's a chance this time, because we've been optimizing that for a while
on the existing internet. Like, this is how you make API request. This is how you search Google.
So, but like, the cool part is with now that we're shifting to cryptographic identities,
because those systems never work because every 10, every five years, we have to rebuild them.
Yes. But with cryptographic identities, there's probably not going to be a second,
like, you're not going to have to rebuild it. It's just going to keep working.
Like, it. How so? What's the main difference?
The permission's gone. Like, at the core of it, that's what it is. Like,
it doesn't go away. The API or the thing doesn't go away. Yes.
Like, for example, like, if you wanted to search the internet back in the,
it was, you learned how to, you learned how to make your program interact with Google.
Alta Vista doesn't exist anymore. It was the search engine before Google.
Yeah, I don't know that. But the Google API endpoint will go away.
But my exact point was you built any software in the early days for that earlier search engine.
Google came along, and now your software doesn't work anymore.
And that's also why the Unix tools don't go away, because they are local first.
Yes. Yes. They don't break. And they never go away.
They don't break because of an external dependency. And what we are trying to do,
is remove all external dependencies. It doesn't mean that everything has to work on your local
machine. But you don't want to have external dependencies. That's the idea about moving from
a server is an external dependency. A relay is not. Yes. Yeah.
Because that's the difference. That's the thing that the podcasting 2.0 people didn't get, for example.
It's, that's a crucial difference. A server truly is an external dependency.
You only have one source of truth. It has power over you. A relay is not an external dependency.
Because it literally can be an internal thing. I have a relay on my phone. I have a relay at home.
And so I can run the relay. And I, and it's completely the changer, but I don't have to trust it.
That's why it's not an external dependency. Commodetized.
And that's the, that's a crucial difference. And what we want to build out now, like with
also agents and DBMCP and so on, like a DVM for example, is, is, is not an, it's the same thing.
It's, a DVM is not an API. It's not an external dependency. It's a different thing. It's a different
set of fits. It's because there can be multiple in some sense. Like they, they, they don't have to
be built to work like it. They, they all work the same way. So they're just interchangeable.
That's, it's just obvious to say, but it's just like a vendor on a large marketplace is not an
external dependency in that sense. It's like, because you can't go to someone else. A restaurant
is not an external dependency. You're not going to starve to death if it closes. You can go to
the next one. That's, yeah. Yeah. It's the same principle. But if all the restaurants are
operated on subscription models, they're very inconvenient. Because now you have to go on,
you've, you've lost your credits with the first one. If you're completely relying on the next one,
yeah. Yeah. That's the difference. And the money lets, the money is what lets you do it.
The money lets with a hop around. Exactly. Exactly. Again, like if you had, if you had
subscriptions, if you had like sign up to go to a restaurant, then it becomes a dependency.
That's why money truly is an asset and credit is a liability in that sense. It's like,
your credit line, if you, if you have like, you know, like a gift card or whatever,
it's like a gift card is not money. It's like, it doesn't have the same, the same purpose.
It's like money proper, proper money. You will always be able to go somewhere else and exchange
for what you need and so on. Like, and that's, that's, that's, it's such a small difference,
but it's, it's so crucial, right? It's always a small, it's like, it's so crucial. It's,
it's, and, and it really helped me to, to think through that once more. Like when,
when I heard you talk about, like trying to explain why it's not so different and why is it,
that's also why it's different from an RSS feed, for example, those kind of things,
because there are a SSP, the data in their RSS feed is not signed. And the podcasting
to the whole people, they run into this issue all the time. Yeah. Where someone will pirate
something and, and just exchange the value block. Yeah. Then you send money to the wrong people,
like that, that's not something that easily happens on an other side. Yeah. Yeah. And with
that, because it really matters where the data lives, you know, like you have a server and it's
the source of truth, your feed is the source of food. Yeah. And it's not the data itself that
it's the source of food. And you can't easily change that after the fact. No. Like you,
you almost need like a consensus level, like everyone to move to sign stuff now. Like it, it,
yeah, it's hard to, it's hard to modify that system. Yeah. That's, and that's why it's just
going to take a long time. It's, it's like, you know, moving people from systems like Twitter to
from systems like YouTube to an officer based solution and those kinds of things,
it takes a long, long, long time. It's just like it, it took a long time for, you know, like,
you know, extend the units tools to, to win over Windows. And then like a couple of decades later,
Windows was forced to basically integrate Linux into the system. It's like, it's really, it's
really funny. Well, yeah, it does. Yeah. But kind of systematic. You use latest Windows?
No, they're trying to go extinct with the way they're designed. You have so much ads. It doesn't
work. They had ads like in the, in the UI directly. The buttons take like, unless you have like a
ridiculously fast computer, the buttons, there's like a half, there's like a quarter second delay
on every button. Okay, it has to load the ads. It's back to like Windows XP. It's crazy. Yeah.
It queries the ad server first on button down. I mean, that's probably what's happening. Yeah,
no, I haven't used Windows in a long, long, long time. I still have a very old, I don't even know
what kind of Windows version it is. But I just unearthed my very old gaming PC just to run models
on it. It all works well enough. So I'm not, I'm not touching it. I'm not upgrading it and so on.
Yeah, I only see it because my friends have Windows machines.
No, I'm not hating. You know, it's like, it's like whatever, whatever works. I did a lot of
photography back in the day and I kind of had to use a Windows machine for all that because
all the Linux stuff just wasn't there yet. Now it's way better. Now you have like dark room and
gimp is also like that was back in the day when gimp was not like one window but 27 different
floating windows. It was interesting times. It's like getting, it's like what we talked about
at the beginning almost. It's like getting used to the things so quickly. Yeah. Like you just kind of
we forget where we came from. Yeah, and then you go back and it's like it's such a strange,
such a strange experience when like, I mean, you go back to like traditional login photos,
email stuff. You still have to log with email and it's like, yeah, now you have to check your
email and there's all this antiquated, right? Yeah, if you're used to it enough stuff,
it feels very antiquated. I never expected to get used to it so fast. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah.
Yeah, yeah. Same for me. It's like, it's, it's, I mean, for me, like paying my breakfast, lunch,
and dinner using a lightning wallet is a normal thing to do now and I'm completely used to it.
And it's like, I don't even think about it, you know, and I sometimes use whatever, you know,
like if I run out of balance with one thing, then I use my nostril client to pay for my coffee
and those kind of things, you know, and it's like, I, I, it's, it's a non-event for me,
which is really interesting. Yeah. It's really interesting. Yeah. And then you go back to the
system and there's just things you've learned. And also, nostril, nostril working, for example,
nostril is my like, I only, I only have nostril. I don't have anything else anymore. So it's the
only thing I basically look into and check and so on, which is also really great because I use
kind of like, again, like I mentioned this many times in the past, I was really addicted to Twitter.
And it's a way, like, it's a, it's a more healthy relationship with technology, in some sense.
Nostril allows me to have a way more healthy relationship with like a feed, with, with, with,
with my friend network, in some sense. It's, it's, it's, for me, it's way, way, way better. And,
and just it working and it being a normal thing, it's like, it, it feels like yesterday where
the only client was like, Brannle, or whatever, he, Jeff call it. And like, everything was broken
and nothing worked. And like, you had some CLI clients and everything was terrible. And it was
so weird that no one understood anything. It's like, no one understood what this thing was.
That was only like, oh, yeah, three years ago or so. That's, that's, that's something like that.
And, and now it's, it's, it looks very snappy. It's very fast. We're like, optimizing things
left and right. I mean, again, like, I'm, I'm using it as one of my main wallets for everything,
which is weird. Like I, I owe Pablo money or something or whatever. It's like, for a coffee,
it's like, I'm just going to set the people. And it's just completely seamless.
Like it's, the, the cool part is we haven't even gotten to the ideas of like,
really seamless yet. Because a lot of the lightning apps, a lot of the other stuff take like multiple
clicks. And you got the right button somewhere in the corner to get it to do that one thing.
Yeah. And it's still, oh, that would actually be a very nice and natural language use case.
Like sent Pablo five bucks and it was a very good look up and it just zaps.
Well, that's what like, that's what.
Yeah, that's really seamless. Like the, the, the sorry to interrupt, but in terms of the,
the vibing stuff, for me, the key unlock was actually speaking to the computer. And, and it's so,
because I use it now for my notes and my to-dos and like, and the things and so on.
And I just speak into my phone and that's it. That's all I do. Everything else is taking care
about the computer. That's what I'm so excited about the dumb models because they, I don't need
the model to think for me for the first use case. I need to build a powerful system. That's my
home assistant. And I need to just run natural language commands against it. And like, there's
so much to do with that. One of them could be, ah, yeah, it sent Pablo five bucks for the coffee
asset. DM somebody something like, the original use case of Siri was that already works. That's
the amazing thing. People don't know that this already works with the stuff that you built.
Talk about this, maybe a little bit more. What's it called? The bakery? I just, for lack of a
better name. It was going to be a notional thing. That's why it's called bakery. I'm thinking now
it's, it's going to be its own thing. But it's, it's, it's meant to be kind of,
the, the vague idea right now is kind of that, like a system that you run in one place,
that you then prompt with AI to do things, a powerful tool for a powerful,
no-ster-focused tool for some sort of AI toolbox. Yeah, you sent me a DM yesterday just by saying
sent G-G-I-D-M and say G-M or something like that. Well, that, that's the cool thing is like,
anyway, the MCP and all that is like, you plug, again, back to like the, the foundation thing
and the fuzzy code. The MCP is a really dumb developer. Yeah. Clicking around and copying stack
overflow. And I'm just providing a solid foundation of tools that can use. This is how you do it. This
is how you're saying that the M, this is how it works. Yeah, like, this is what you do. This is
what you need. This is how you look up a person. This is what I trust about. This is how you ask
me to sign something and then. Yeah, that's so cool because it's like, you can do that. And again,
like this already works. Trust it completely. And, and, and like you amber on your phone will pop up
and you will just sign, sign it here and there. Yeah. It's, it's so cool. And just, just, just, just to
reiterate the point, like the, the, what I think is so cool because once you have the, the
natural language prompt working, the switch to audio is like a non-event. But no, you can't,
this was my point of view. You can't switch to audio without that insight into the system.
Yeah. Because if, if I plugged open AI into like telegram to DM my friends, right?
I like, I can't, there's no way in a, I can know for 100% that I'm going to be able to verify
that message before it sends. Yeah. But the fact that we have the keys, the fact that we have that
last. Yeah, you're completely controlled. I can completely control. I can switch out the model
for a different one every single day for a different flavor of message. And I won't worry at all
because I can see the message it wants to sign. And if I don't like it, I just don't let it do it.
Yeah. And, and it's complete trust. And, and just to paint the picture, like, because that's,
that's my current workflow. It's like, I'll be out and about and I'll be, you know,
walking from one place to the other or whatever. And I, I remember like, I, I either have an
inside or remember something I need to do. So I'll, I'll pop out my phone and I'll speak into the
phone for like 30 seconds. Oh, I just remember that I need to, you know, like, I don't know.
I, I need to DM hazard that we need to go on a walk or whatever. And for the exact time. And,
and with that stuff, it's like, it's, it's exactly the same tool chain and everything. And it can
actually send at the end. Yeah. And it can actually send them money. Again, like, I, oh, I just
remember that old Pablo with five bucks for the coffee yesterday or whatever. And it can actually
literally just pick that up. And on, on your, your phone will pop up with amber and it's like,
okay, you want to sign this, which is the DM. We want to sign this, which sends to five bucks.
And that's it. And you sign off on it. And that's it. And that's like, the, the truly is a very
powerful virtual assistant in some sense. It really is as cool as that. The next, I want to
experiment with this with a few, a few more on those traps. But we're, this is going to make it
very obvious that we're lacking in the most signing software category. Yeah, because right now,
like Amber's Android, Android only. But more, no more, more than that, because
Amber is awesome, but it signs everything. So it means it's too broad to show me exactly what
it's doing. Even if it like shows a kind one that it wants to sign, I still can't quite see what
it's doing. But if I could, what if I had five amber apps on my phone? And one was dedicated
only signing nip 60 wallet stuff. So all it was focused on was signing the events for me and for
that. And it would show me the details about everything. Like, you want this transaction,
it's probably going here, the money's coming out of here. And then another one, it's just social.
Yeah. And having that the smarter, like, we're going to need smarter sign, like,
it's going to be interesting. I'll be trying to do something like that, right? They're
extension with like, let's be reasonable. I fully trust it. I'm paranoid, ask me every time those
kind of levels. And, and, and the other thing is like, it, I think it just has to be like a
visual indication that, for example, you're sending money now. So you actually want to
probably sign up on that and double check it. But I think, I think we're on our way of figuring
all that out. Like, we have the budgets and those kinds of things, because like, if it's like 20
cents, like, you don't need to. But it's more than like, the thing is like automation doesn't
solve it. Yeah. Until you, you need to solve the first problem you need to solve is understanding,
and then you can automate it. Yeah. So you need, you need, you need to wait for the user to see what
they're signing. Understand it within half a second. Yeah. Look at the screen and be like,
this is a signature for a long form post. Yeah. And then like, okay, I, I, I, I read, I, you
browse through it. Okay. It looks good. Yeah. And then after that, you can, you can say auto
approval. Yeah. And also, exactly. Exactly. And that's, it relates to what you mentioned about
the trust, because if you build trust, if you actually trust the thing, I'm gonna auto approve.
And then you just needs to be transparent that you need to, like, I'm gonna, I want to look back,
and I want to see what the things spent in the last week, or whatever, and so on, and it's like,
and that's, I think that's how it's going to work. That's how it's going to evolve. But I really,
I really like what kind of was cooked up in the last couple of weeks, because it, it all
evolved so quickly. And now, and that's where we at now. We, we actually have human language
interfaces into Noster, into wallets, it's like, we can sap, we can do things, we can do all kinds
of things. We can, we can, a month. Yeah. Where? Oh, it's building the month. Open AI, and they're
still, they're still trying to get AI. You can't, unless you like sign up for like five subscriptions,
you're not going to get, you're not going to get your open AI model to send an email for you.
Now, we just have to get better at explaining it, showing it to other people. I think even people
inside our little bubble will have trouble wrapping their head around it, and what it really is,
and what it really means. But I'm, I'm really, really kind of optimistic, because
shipping examples, we already have the marketplaces. And so, so, so it's very much like, in the beginning,
when Noster was like, like, Fijajab basically launched Noster, no one understood it, but it
was already life. And it's the same thing now. What we have is already life. And so, you, you,
you, if someone publishes a code snippet, if someone publishes, you know, DBMCP thing, whatever,
it will pop up immediately and other people can pick it up. And you can immediately, instantly
interact with all of it. And also, on, on, you know, on the, on the bakery side of what you
build and so on, it's like, you, you, you literally can, you know, use one of your sock
or whatever or punch in your real life. And you can just let it do stuff. And that's so magical,
right? It's just like, you know, post GM, and it will do it. Yeah, yeah. And you can literally
talk into your computer and your phone and it's like, post GM, and it will do the things. It's
really cool. It's going to be, it's going to be incredible for that. Like I said, the,
the prompting the commands is that it's, I don't know, like, there's so much we've been,
like I said, it was the promise of like, when I grew up, it was like, promise like,
Siri came out. Yeah. And that was the promise. You're going to be able to do anything. You're
not going to be like, it's not, they had a longer promise. You're like, you'll talk to your phone,
but I don't know. It was like, for me, it was a star trek computer. That's like generational
differences. But it just hasn't never, it never came. Yeah. And now like, it's something like,
yeah, now it's here. Systems are open. And now it's, now it's here. It's actually, you can
actually build it. You can do it. It runs without, it works, which is crazy.
Yeah, it's really cool. It's really cool. It actually works now.
All right. Let's have, let's grab some coffee and see if we can work on explaining it to other
people a little bit more. Maybe write a, buy the blog posts into existence. Yeah. You need to
write, you need to write one of the blog posts that you talked about in the, you know, JavaScript
UI framework context is like, you need to sit down, write about this, explain it to other people,
explain it to our podcasting 2.0 friends, explain it to some of the other
JavaScript front end developers and some, some tech people that should be interested in that stuff.
We'll write more for that. Same reason. Just like use obsidian more, get right more notes down,
write more blog posts because they, yeah. Yeah. We'll get it. It's good to get the information out.
We'll get there. All right. What do you say? Coffee, orange juice, something like that. I'm cooked.
The sun's up now. It's going to be hot today. All right. Let's hope that all this worked.
It's always, with me, it's always, you know, a gamble whether the recording actually worked or not.
That looks good.