competition implies taking different approaches. i don't think that the cap approach is inherently more confusing. the point is, there is more than one way to make a good UX on top of differing cryptographic primitives. you have one method, and that's fine, i think that capability security is a better approach so that's the path i'm taking.

i don't care about millions of people. mass adoption is fine, but i don't care about the people who already have internet, smartphones, and need convincing to drop their shitty spyware android device. i care about the billions of people who are coming online in the next 5-10 years. i'm developing[0] a stack that integrates hardware, software, and p2p/mesh protocols to compete directly with telcos and OEMs.

when you include hardware security, the user experience of per-device keys is much nicer. you need a passcode that is used to protect your device-entangled key and that's it. new devices pair like bluetooth, securely handshake, and publish `sameAs` depending on the type of device. users don't need to worry about anything beyond the device passcode. projects like dark crystal[1] make it easy to generate and distribute an emergency key that can be used to restore access to your devices if you forget your code.

[0]: https://heropunch.io/

[1]: https://darkcrystal.pw/