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

Nostr

nostr.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

151–160 of 347 posts

Re: Nostr

#151

Post by digitalbase »

gwd wrote: post #147

Don't know much about Nostr, but wondered re the spam problem, if it would make sense to introduce the idea of proof-of-work for the identities? A quick search shows that the have optional PoW proposals for notes (i.e., individual posts), but I didn't see anything about PoW for identities . People could spend $1, or $5, or $50 of compute for an identity, and others could use the cost of the identity as a filter. Havi…

Here is the Network Implementation Proposal for POW (https://nips.nostr.com/13)

Identity on nostr is just a public/private keypair.

You can enhance that identity by sending a kind0 (metadata) note with your name, bio, pictures. So i guess you're suggestion to add PoW for kind0 events which is covered by NIP13 too.

Re: Nostr

#152

Post by r721 »

digitalbase wrote: post #150
r721 wrote: post #149

I still don't understand how Nostr would behave in this hypothetical scenario - a bad actor creates 100k key pairs (via residential proxies) and posts 10 LLM-generated replies to each new post. Who would fight with that wave of spam exactly and how?

This is happening today. The answer is trusted relays and Web of Trust Long-time nostr user. My feeds are all spam free. Not to say there aren't any other problems :-)

I guess it's easier with commercial spam when they have to advertise something, and that could be detected (website, product, etc)

But when it's just a new account with a few LLM-generated replies - how would trusted relay automatically detect the malicious intent?

Re: Nostr

#153

Post by veeti »

thrownawaysz wrote: post #58

>apolitical communication commons Some people say that labeling yourself apolitical is 1, a polticial statement 2, a privilege itself which puts you into a certain socio-political position

Those people can stick to their little Mastodon instances where they can play God.

Re: Nostr

#154

Post by numpad0 »

nunobrito wrote: post #19
BoorishBears wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

3 people have shared this experience in the thread. Is there a fundamental reason this wouldn't be true? Isn't it a place where people can anonymously share multimedia with minimal moderation? In my experience even the most toy application exposed to the wider internet will face this issue.

Everytime NOSTR is mentioned there are people from other networks coming here to spread FUD. The best thing is asking them to provide steps for replicating their claims, which they won't since it is the not the common user experience at all.

Yeah, they could say such and such handles are spreading content disgusting in such and such ways, e.g. "users like Sam Altman are posting astronauts riding horses on the Moon". They don't have to be so specific that exact contents would be actually accessible, only plausible. The mental imagery would not have to be precisely imaginable to disgusting details.

It's odd that they see "tons of" things that they can't describe beyond it belongs in the category, as if, just as if, actually characterizing it beyond making trust me remarks would lead to formation of broad consensus against them rather than against the contents.

Re: Nostr

#155

Post by nunobrito »

littlecranky67 wrote: post #80
nunobrito wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It nowhere similar to Monero in privacy, because it was never private to begin with. Please read: https://bitcoinmagazine.com/technical/state-of-bitcoin-light... And attention that Monero isn't the only privacy coin in town, but it is the one that is without doubt more attacked by governments due to its privacy. You don't see the same treatment for neither LN nor bitcoin, instead you see governments supporting it. Th…

Your link is from 2022 - blinded paths are now here in lightning. Async- and trampoline payments are around the corner. The article is heavily outdated. I am involved in Lightning and run my own node - it is pretty much private enough for all sorts of micro payments for content creators. Not private enough for organized crime to move large sums, agreed. You also forget to mention the 51% attack monero recently suffer…

By all means, here is a study from 2024 documenting the hard facts about lack of privacy and lack of resiliency: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S030859612...

That 51% attack on Monero never happened, despite much noise and headlines saying initially otherwise. You can verify this for yourself.

Re: Nostr

#156

Post by gwd »

digitalbase wrote: post #151
gwd wrote: post #147

Don't know much about Nostr, but wondered re the spam problem, if it would make sense to introduce the idea of proof-of-work for the identities? A quick search shows that the have optional PoW proposals for notes (i.e., individual posts), but I didn't see anything about PoW for identities . People could spend $1, or $5, or $50 of compute for an identity, and others could use the cost of the identity as a filter. Havi…

Here is the Network Implementation Proposal for POW ( https://nips.nostr.com/13 ) Identity on nostr is just a public/private keypair. You can enhance that identity by sending a kind0 (metadata) note with your name, bio, pictures. So i guess you're suggestion to add PoW for kind0 events which is covered by NIP13 too.

Right, so the general NIP13 could be used to define a "ID proof-of-work" note attached to an ID. You could add PoW notes after ID creation, or create new, more difficult notes if the original one turned out to be insufficient.

But although there's the technical components available to easily build such a thing, you're not aware of such a standard having been discussed, much less defined?

EDIT: To be clear, the idea for this would be a equivalent of the "blue check mark", but 1) you pay it yourself and 2) you can make it as cheap or expensive as you want.

Re: Nostr

#157

Post by fiatjaf »

dbushell wrote: post #34

A big misconception I've seen is the assumption that Nostr relays are federated and share messages between one another. This is not how it works. So if you're building a "Twitter clone" the client app must search multiple relays and post to multiple relays. If clients are not using a relay in common they cannot see one another. The end result is a bad experience for both user and developer. Using a single relay is ce…

That's a misconception: you don't "use" relays (in the sense that you don't have to have a static list of relays you always use), you write to relays. When reading you connect to the relays of whatever the people you want to read from.

Some apps indeed use this method of selecting a static set of relays, and if that was the protocol you would be correct about centralization or bloat, but this is legacy from a naïve unfinished early implementation, most apps do the correct thing now and the rest is transitioning.

Re: Nostr

#158

Post by nunobrito »

troupo wrote: post #120
nunobrito wrote: post #87

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not really. Cryptos are born out of criticism for current systems and they are an ever evolving technology fueled by those same critics. What doesn't make sense is when the other party starts making stories just to tarnish other competing technologies. Just now the OP was asked to provide details to replicate his findings and those were indeed very "fuzzy" to say the least.

> Cryptos are born out of criticism for current systems Nope. Most are born out of people not understanding how existing systems work and/or looking to get rich quick. > an ever evolving technology fueled by those same critics. No, it's mostly a self-perpetuating self-congratulatory hype machine busily re-inventing the systems they criticise > What doesn't make sense is when the other party starts making stories just…

All of that is correct, albeit not the full picture.

Crypto wasn't created as a "get rich quick". I say this because I was there since the early days and participated quite a bit on the related BBS. Back then you'd already make good money building bots for day trading on stocks, crypto was really about a type of currency that no government could touch.

Nowadays the large majority of users are desperate to make some money through pyramid schemes and pure speculation to "get rich quick" albeit they usually end up losing money. The small minority is doing what they've always done: looking at systems, criticizing systems and building their own solutions to those systems.

There is really good stuff being built. Not many do it, granted.

Re: Nostr

#159

Post by BlueTemplar »

littlecranky67 wrote: post #56
otabdeveloper4 wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> more like a network of privately hosted personal websites Can't monetize that.

You can zapp on nostr - lightning based payments. There were efforts to bring micro payments to the regular Web, but in the end it failed because in the traditional finance world, you can't just send 2cents to someone on the other side of the world - because intermediaeries will charge you 50cents of fees for that.

Pretty sure that the main reason Flattr (whether 1.0 or 2.0) failed, was because it wasn't backed by the Silicon Valley ?

Re: Nostr

#160

Post by fiatjaf »

numpad0 wrote: post #108

My back-burner idea: the equivalents of Nostr relays, Mastodon instances, Discord servers, etc. needs to be self-hostable in client apps for decentralized social media to work. Not only classical P2P software did exactly this, it worked/works beautifully. The only reason classical P2P software did not work and did not replace WWW as application was because of piracy prosecutions that makes users responsible for hosti…

This is cool but P2P doesn't work. Iroh also relies on "relays" in a sense. Nostr makes that explicit and gives relays identities so they can freely enact policies instead of having to hack that in weird ways.
Post reply on HN