Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Why I’m betting on Nostr

hivemind.vc

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–150 of 166 posts

Re: Why I’m betting on Nostr

#141

Post by irusensei »

intotheabyss wrote: post #12
unboxingelf wrote: post #5

as a dev and nostr user, here’s my elevator pitch: everything is an event. events are signed using pki so it’s easy to know who sent the event and it’s authentic. they’re human readable json objects. events flow over websockets so it’s “real time”. you can build literally anything on this platform - listen for a type of event, do something, emit another. it can all interoperable. we started with basic twitter clones…

Why would you use Bitcoin lightning when you can use Ethereum L2s?

I think someone did some monero focused client and relay implementation. Go on and create your own nostr eth implementation. Maybe even try to submit a NIP for this.

Re: Why I’m betting on Nostr

#142

Post by 3np »

antisocialist wrote: post #111
evbogue wrote: post #15

I tried Nostr for awhile, and I appreciate that they're picking up where Scuttlebot left off. There are a few things that bug me about it that I wish they'd fix, or that some future protocol will solve. First, I want a replication strategy. Nostr messages get lost in time, and many of the clients end up just blasting an entire message history at your client. Because there's no clue in the protocol how messages are re…

In other words, Nostr can't do almost anything that matters. > First, I want a replication strategy. xx Network has message replication built in. > Third, someone needs to delete some of these NIPS. xx Network lets you delete messages. > Fourth, it needs a dedicated blob store protocol. For blobs, clients should be able to plug in to any 3rd party blob storage (e.g. Crust Network). This secondary storage is needed on…

Oh hey David Schaum has entered the chat to shill their thing

Re: Why I’m betting on Nostr

#143

Post by 3np »

unboxingelf wrote: post #27
Canada wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If a validator adds a blacklisted transaction, they will be slashed [0]. This is incorrect, and your reference doesn't back the statement up. Validators don't have to include any transaction they don't want to, just like Bitcoin mining pools don't have to either.

They do not have to, but they risk being slashed if they add transactions that are not “correct” as per the network. The link I provided shows this coercion via OFAC compliance.

No, your link shows that a majority of validators will not include certain transactions in a block. While problematic in itself, there is nothing around slashing other validators who do so, on their allotted blocks.

Technically you can still obtain 32 ETH on the market, permissionlessly set up your own beacon-, validator- and execution clients and wait until it's your go to send out txes.

Re: Why I’m betting on Nostr

#144

Post by 3np »

jrm4 wrote: post #58

I tried it for a bit, and for both content and tech, tying it to Bitcoin seems like -- perhaps not a deal-killer, but mostly pointless and trying to hard. The theory is cool, it makes sense, you have your identity tied to your Bitcoin public key. But it just seems unnecessary to focus on this particular bit of the technology, when the human relationships via something like Mastodon and federation seem to be just fine…

> you have your identity tied to your Bitcoin public key.

Uhm, where did you see that?

Re: Why I’m betting on Nostr

#145

Post by unboxingelf »

BoorishBears wrote: post #101
unboxingelf wrote: post #93

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It removes trusting a 3rd party.

That's not a value proposition. The only trust a 3rd party like Twitter demands in your example is that I trust they won't impersonate my account with a message (since there's no private/public key proof) But your system doesn't address that either. After all, what's stopping _anyone_ from just saying they're me and sending out messages? Like 99% of decentralized usecases, this still falls down to trying to cheat the…

It certainly is for some.

You are correct - it allows consumers to know the message has not been tampered.

The downside of your trust model is permission. Facebook and Twitter may revoke your permission to use “your” identity at any time, for any reason.

Requiring ID verification for a rented online identity is a terrible trend imo. These companies are not to be trusted - they exploit users and inevitably sell your data or get breached.

Re: Why I’m betting on Nostr

#146

Post by evbogue »

nunobrito wrote: post #126
jazzyjackson wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

IPFS is so heavy and unperformant, just not a lot of bang for your buck when paying for a host. As far as I can tell it owes its success to VC funded blockchain startups subsidizing hosts with 8:1 payouts for hosting other peoples' stuff I'm betting on webtorrent paired with seedboxes - your peer just has to serve whatever mp3/mp4 you're hosting to the first few clients, and as long as their browser windows are open…

Keep it simple. Just post the SHA256 hash on the note and when publishing keep sending the file to some file hosting server (as done today). The file host will be gone one day, hopefully some other server will have the same hash. SHA256 is not enough? Just use a tag like file:sha256:blablablabla and you now support better hashes in the future. Nostr isn't about blockchain nor a crazy fear of losing data. It is intend…

I like the idea of simply hashlinking to a blob. Then, ask a random relay if they have it.

If we don't want a global scope for blob sharing maybe the relay only responds if we are friends/members of the relay.

Re: Why I’m betting on Nostr

#147

Post by jrm4 »

3np wrote: post #144
jrm4 wrote: post #58

I tried it for a bit, and for both content and tech, tying it to Bitcoin seems like -- perhaps not a deal-killer, but mostly pointless and trying to hard. The theory is cool, it makes sense, you have your identity tied to your Bitcoin public key. But it just seems unnecessary to focus on this particular bit of the technology, when the human relationships via something like Mastodon and federation seem to be just fine…

> you have your identity tied to your Bitcoin public key. Uhm, where did you see that?

That is how it is presented; I'm aware that you can probably use it without owning any Bitcoin, but again -- even the Twitter guy is touting that being the point of it.

Re: Why I’m betting on Nostr

#148

Post by 3np »

brabel wrote: post #127

> I believe this idea could integrate with Block’s vision for Web 5, which to the best of my understanding, also anchors Decentralized Identifiers (DIDs) into the Bitcoin blockchain. There's a lot of effort going on in the EU to enable international, decentralized identity that can be recognized by every country. The first thing they decided was that DIDs on the blockchain are a terrible idea. GDPR demands that perso…

No. That's just strawmanning a terrible implementation.

Here's another less terrible one: Public certificates of ID issuers are what's stored on-chain. Individual users have their (potentially locally generated) DIDs cross-signed by an issuer. The only data being stored on-chain is issuer certificates (and potentially further signatures and metadata around them) and this makes it possible to run the whole scheme in a more decentralized fashion.

Re: Why I’m betting on Nostr

#149

Post by 3np »

jb55 wrote: post #33
evbogue wrote: post #15

I tried Nostr for awhile, and I appreciate that they're picking up where Scuttlebot left off. There are a few things that bug me about it that I wish they'd fix, or that some future protocol will solve. First, I want a replication strategy. Nostr messages get lost in time, and many of the clients end up just blasting an entire message history at your client. Because there's no clue in the protocol how messages are re…

Hey, author of https://damus.io here (ios twitter-like nostr client) > First, I want a replication strategy. Nostr messages get lost in time, and many of the clients end up just blasting an entire message history at your client. Because there's no clue in the protocol how messages are related other than a timestamp this also means you can fake timestamps and write fake messages in the future or back in time You can d…

> > First, I want a replication strategy. Nostr messages get lost in time, and many of the clients end up just blasting an entire message history at your client. Because there's no clue in the protocol how messages are related other than a timestamp this also means you can fake timestamps and write fake messages in the future or back in time

> You can do this with email or git too and it doesn't make it any less useful.

In the sense that you can fake timestamps, you're of course correct on git and anything else beyond public blockchains.

In the other sen, git is a counter-example of what I take the author's main point to be, in that commits do have an mandated relationship and linkage that Nostr noted don't.

Re: Why I’m betting on Nostr

#150

Post by 3np »

kaliqt wrote: post #104
jazzyjackson wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

IPFS is so heavy and unperformant, just not a lot of bang for your buck when paying for a host. As far as I can tell it owes its success to VC funded blockchain startups subsidizing hosts with 8:1 payouts for hosting other peoples' stuff I'm betting on webtorrent paired with seedboxes - your peer just has to serve whatever mp3/mp4 you're hosting to the first few clients, and as long as their browser windows are open…

Would be nice to see a well secure alternative to torrent and IPFS so we can just settle and use it. Ideally encrypted and anonymous optionally too.

Veilid is trying, at least

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=37118124

https://veilid.com/defcon/talk/

Post reply on HN