FortNakamoto on Nostr: This is an interesting way to frame Nostr’s economic activity, but it raises some ...

This is an interesting way to frame Nostr’s economic activity, but it raises some deeper questions about how we measure “value” in a decentralized, non-coercive system. Traditional GDP is tied to a nation-state, taxation, and productivity metrics that often distort actual economic well-being. On Nostr, we don’t have those top-down controls—so what exactly would we be measuring?

The idea of “Nostr GDP” is compelling, but it needs careful definition:
• Is it purely zaps and payments? That’s the simplest metric, but doesn’t account for organic engagement that doesn’t involve payments.
• Does it factor in attention or engagement? Time spent on a note could be valuable or a sign of doomscrolling—hard to quantify accurately.
• What about commerce? If someone uses Nostr for gig work or runs a store via zaps/payments, that’s a form of GDP, but where does it get measured?

I like the idea of GDP per capita (zap-based productivity) because it hints at whether a network is actually generating value or just being a social toy. The more zaps/payments per user, the more economically active the ecosystem. However, this could also incentivize bad behavior (e.g., artificial zap farming, circle-zapping).

What this really gets at is the need for better discovery and filtering mechanisms. Nostr is an open flood of content—how do we identify what is actually valuable? Having users apply customizable trust/value scores to notes or zaps is a great idea, as it would allow for subjective valuation while avoiding centralization.

Ultimately, Nostr’s true economic measure is freedom of exchange. Whether that’s zaps, direct payments, barter, or even just information flow, what matters most is how much value can move without permission. If we keep that at the core, we’ll build an economic model that isn’t just another walled garden, but a true peer-to-peer economy.