Sounds interesting but my main concern is the anti-spam approach. It sounds good for general spam but what about a concerted defamation campaign from someone. How do you deal with that?
Fiatjaf/nostr – a censorship-resistant alternative to Twitter
41–50 of 144 posts
Re: Fiatjaf/nostr – a censorship-resistant alternative to Twitter
#42> it does not rely on P2P techniques, therefore it works. followed by > To publish something, you write a post, sign it with your key and send it to multiple relays (servers hosted by someone else, or yourself). To get updates from other people, you ask multiple relays if they know anything about these other people. Anyone can run a relay. Sounds pretty much like P2P techniques to me.
The difference with nostr is lots of redundancy -- you post your content to like 5 servers so that if one goes down you're not really censored, people still get your content and -- in your list of relays -- you replace the censorious one and then your followers update where they follow you at.
Re: Fiatjaf/nostr – a censorship-resistant alternative to Twitter
#43Earlier quoted context omitted.
> A relay can block a user from publishing anything there. The point is that it won’t be effective since messages are pushed to/pulled from multiple relays.
Unless relays come together and agree to block someone or something. As long as there are enough relays this is improbable
Re: Fiatjaf/nostr – a censorship-resistant alternative to Twitter
#44Why so complicated? Just setup your personal website with RSS feeds.
The people who cry about censorship on big platforms are people who want to access the audience. They aren't crying for the censorship itself (they usually love when people with opposing views get banned), they are just using that word to complain about them losing an audience. Setting up a personal website doesn't meet that goal, and probably a thing like this doesn't either. Most of the nazis etc. are quite miserab…
Re: Fiatjaf/nostr – a censorship-resistant alternative to Twitter
#45Re: Fiatjaf/nostr – a censorship-resistant alternative to Twitter
#46Earlier quoted context omitted.
That's true, but you can disconnect those requirements on the server side. E.g. a "name/profile to key/value" service would be useful for more than this. If people want mastodon style handles, for example, it's easy enough to create a mapping that can leverage DNS for example to let you query for a matching pubkey in a cacheable and easily scalable way and without the need for that to be built into the messaging prot…
> That's true, but you can disconnect those requirements on the server side. > E.g. a "name/profile to key/value" service would be useful for more than this. At which point you've reintroduced a global namespace SPOF that is vulnerable to censorship, etc. You can push the complexity around like food on a plate, but getting rid of it is another matter entirely.
(and in fact on reading the protocol specs, they do have a way for relays to publish mappings [1] . EDIT: and that would seem to make it possible for crawlers to crawl relays to assemble non-canonical catalogs fairly easily).
There are downsides to having multiple namespaces, such as e.g. that there's no guarantee that your client will be able to map a given pubkey back to a human-readable name and/or dealing with collisions between mappings from different sources, of course, but this is reasonably well thread ground.
Re: Fiatjaf/nostr – a censorship-resistant alternative to Twitter
#47Earlier quoted context omitted.
Unless relays come together and agree to block someone or something. As long as there are enough relays this is improbable
At which point you can setup your own relay, you don't have a block here
These are all questions we've already seen from USENET; in fact, it's not entirely clear to me what the benefit to this protocol is over USENET, except it's new.
Re: Fiatjaf/nostr – a censorship-resistant alternative to Twitter
#48Re: Fiatjaf/nostr – a censorship-resistant alternative to Twitter
#49> it does not rely on P2P techniques, therefore it works. followed by > To publish something, you write a post, sign it with your key and send it to multiple relays (servers hosted by someone else, or yourself). To get updates from other people, you ask multiple relays if they know anything about these other people. Anyone can run a relay. Sounds pretty much like P2P techniques to me.
Re: Fiatjaf/nostr – a censorship-resistant alternative to Twitter
#50I'm using branle ( https://branle.fiatjaf.com/ ) as my client and you can follow me with my pubkey: 22e804d26ed16b68db5259e78449e96dab5d464c8f470bda3eb1a70467f2c793. You can find my pubring on my bio after following me. There's no ability to discover others at this time! Nostr relay registry hosted here ( https://nostr-registry.netlify.app ) by fiatjaf. Exciting times!
> I'm using branle ( https://branle.fiatjaf.com/ ) as my client and you can follow me with my pubkey: 22e804d26ed16b68db5259e78449e96dab5d464c8f470bda3eb1a70467f2c793. It isn't too hard to improve upon the status quo in various ways when you just drop a key usability requirement (in this case, the need for human-memorable 'handles'). It is worth reading 'Why Johnny Can't Encrypt' (1999) [0], 'Why Johnny Still Can't E…