No. The value is in having 1-man teams.

Of course. But it would result in something completely different and not necessarily better.

My fren nostr:nprofile1qqsqdqc0dj6eyk7c9n99n0dgfrcq2enxmlcyd3fc9936n9azxndyp3gk59y83. has been looking for a job since he joined Nostr and is a good dev. Growing too

Rockefeller's playbook: hire talent to control the narrative, Gates and Bezos do it too.

For $10 million you can incentivize anyone to outdo them. The price point is almost fictional. It discourages competition, makes it a monopoly market and by extension, tanks product quality (the high pay creates reverse incentives for those who get to push hard for the best product).

https://media1.tenor.com/m/IYpzxhqXhfYAAAAd/reasonsimbroke-larry-david.gif no i want adversaries building this protocol out, not best friends.

Focused teams outperform solo efforts, just like lions hunting together.

In a perfect world, perhaps, yet the $10M funder would be a point of failure because they would be susceptible to the temptations of censorship/corruption.

Centralization is not as efficient as you might think, even Google pushes competing products (there was a point in time where you could download 5 or so different, Google owned, chat apps in Android). Perhaps 10 5-man teams would be a better bet.

Nobody withheld anybody from working together. If it did not happen organically then there were probably reasons for this. There were even organised meetups like nostr:nprofile1qqsg8kve59yxyhpa9wupntesvnq0dgfd0k5g769jc6fzrua8gct36xgcmk6nu where you could meet people, participate in larger groups an...