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

Nostr is a stupid simple P2P protocol that works, built by builders

news.ycombinator.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 132 posts

Re: Nostr is a stupid simple P2P protocol that works, built by builders

#81

Post by assetlabel »

bawolff wrote: post #37

So reading the github page this sounds basically like a variation on RSS. There are a number of web servers that host content (either for free or for money) [called relays]. Clients download recent posts Identity is based on public key, allowing users more control and the ability to easily change relays. So is RSS + pubkey based identity the right way to think about this?

That is how I think of it. RSS with user-created public key identities. Lots of client fan-out to lots of relays. And a straightforward way for anyone to post (unlike RSS)

Relays have to figure out how not to get smashed with too much data. I predict they will require an account/login at some point. But you can post to multiple relays and drop relays that don't serve you well at any time.

Re: Nostr is a stupid simple P2P protocol that works, built by builders

#82

Post by assetlabel »

procrastitron wrote: post #12
klabb3 wrote: post #4

Not saying this is the future, but something like it is. All of the core decisions here are solid (pub key identities, signed events, dumb relays). There are still features that many apps will need such as tying multiple devices to an identity, abuse prevention for relay operators, etc.

“All of the core decisions here are solid (pub key identities…” I agree, except for the bit about public keys as identities. I think public key identities are a step in the right direction, but there’s still a gap between that and what the ultimate solution is going to wind up being. We need to have some layer of indirection between user identities and public keys so that users can do things like rotate keys, have mu…

Rotate keys: old key signs an event indicating that it is being rolled into a new key.

Multiple keys: nothing to change. Works like that now.

Recover your identity: Well, if you want a well-known identity use NIP-05/NIP-35 and just change your .well-known/nostr.json file to point to your new identity, the one that hasn't been stolen. Hopefully nostr clients of your followers will respect that (who knows what programmers actually will do).

I think these problems are easier than you think they are.

Re: Nostr is a stupid simple P2P protocol that works, built by builders

#83

Post by assetlabel »

eps wrote: post #49

> A relay doesn't talk to another relay, only directly to users. Can you elaborate on this point? It would seem that meshing relays would've facilitated the dispersal of updates.

People generally post to 5 or so relays for censorship resistance. If you want to follow them, you need to query at least 1 of those 5 relays.

Nothing in the protocol specifies relay-to-relay communication, but nothing stops them either.

Re: Nostr is a stupid simple P2P protocol that works, built by builders

#84

Post by kdragon »

fiatjaf wrote: post #32
kdragon wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My vote is for extended keys, something based off HD Wallets: https://github.com/bitcoin/bips/blob/master/bip-0032.mediawi... Easy rotation and recovery of individual keys, but you do have to protect your master seed. Nostr also supports user verification through DNS hostnames. https://github.com/nostr-protocol/nips/blob/master/05.md

How can you rotate that? No one knows the second key is related to the first. You still need to publish your second key somewhere along with an invalidation certificate for the first key.

They do with the extended key as it includes the chain code.

Re: Nostr is a stupid simple P2P protocol that works, built by builders

#85

Post by kdragon »

arcticbull wrote: post #65
jonstaab wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Bitcoin is carbon-negative believe it or not. Not that CO2 emissions are a meaningful measure of environmental stewardship.

I absolutely, unequivocally do not believe it. Bitcoin consumes 111TWh annually, the power consumption of the Netherlands, and emits 62Mt of CO2 per year, the same as Belarus. It also yields 42kT of e-waste per year. Each transaction produces 650kg of CO2, consumes 1160kWh of power (as much as 40 days consumption for the average American home) and produces 450g of e-waste (about the same as hucking your iPad into the…

So much FUD.

1) miners profit from energy surplus. They do not create new power plants. Nobody is firing up a new coal plant to mine bitcoin. That is absurd.

2) miners have incentives to find and use wasted energy. For ex, flare gas recycling. Which actually helps the environment.

3) miners can turn on/off at will, and produce energy loads on demand. Which means they balance out the energy grid. Especially from erratic energy sources like wind and solar. This is already being deployed in some states.

You are fighting on the wrong side buddy.

Re: Nostr is a stupid simple P2P protocol that works, built by builders

#86

Post by leke »

StillBored wrote: post #80

A huge advantage to many large projects is separations of concerns, particularly in the case of protocol (or API/etc) vs policy. From the sounds of it, you have the protocol but not the policy. Which is by itself huge that they are separate, but now the clients (?) needs flexible policy, no? Otherwise its just going to turn into a billion people all talking in the same room, or your going to have a ton of tiny rooms…

Still trying to understand how it all works but maybe there could be some agreed way of creating rooms, like naming them after sub Reddits.

Re: Nostr is a stupid simple P2P protocol that works, built by builders

#87

Post by imiric »

egypturnash wrote: post #10

So how does nostr propose to solve the problem where there is, in fact, quite a lot of content that you want to filter out, whether because it makes for a better experience for the people using this protocol to talk to each other, or because there are some pretty solid laws about things that various governments require people to filter out? https://abovethelaw.com/2022/11/hey-elon-let-me-help-you-spe... is a pretty d…

That's a great article, and balancing free speech with censorship is a difficult problem. But it becomes a constant headache only on centralized platforms, where no amount of resources can realistically monitor and filter all content. This scales in complexity as the platform grows, which is the goal of any centralized service. And if the business model depends on advertising, it becomes even messier and crucial to its existence.

P2P services OTOH work on a decentralized and pull model. Users share and only subscribe to the content they're interested in. Censorship is distributed, and it's a problem for people who don't wish to see specific content. It's the way the internet works, and the existing approach of removing sensitive content applies to P2P services as well. Since there are no advertisers to appease, it's not an existential problem.

Re: Nostr is a stupid simple P2P protocol that works, built by builders

#88

Post by kdragon »

jasonlotito wrote: post #44

shill: One who poses as a satisfied customer or an enthusiastic gambler to dupe bystanders into participating in a swindle. It's not shilling. It's recommending. Shilling is a bad thing. It's a simple thing.

I was being a bit dramatic with my choice of words but you are absolutely right :-D

Re: Nostr is a stupid simple P2P protocol that works, built by builders

#89

Post by kdragon »

ffggffggj wrote: post #42
stonogo wrote: post #41

What does "built by builders" mean?

Crypto people talk like this to distinguish real projects from ones that were purchased off the shelf and launched by marketers/hustlers. I’m guessing the guy who wrote this is a crypto person who doesn’t realize the slang is so local.

Guilty >_>

It feels nice when a protocol has its core devs on the same wavelength as application devs. That's the feeling I get with nostr.

Re: Nostr is a stupid simple P2P protocol that works, built by builders

#90

Post by defanor »

bawolff wrote: post #37

So reading the github page this sounds basically like a variation on RSS. There are a number of web servers that host content (either for free or for money) [called relays]. Clients download recent posts Identity is based on public key, allowing users more control and the ability to easily change relays. So is RSS + pubkey based identity the right way to think about this?

That's roughly my first thought too: the project seemed like pubsub with message authentication and without federation. Was about to bring up "Atom and RSS, mailing lists, NNTP, XMPP, ActivityPub, Matrix" as examples of existing protocols capable of that (to a different extent, and usually with more functionality), thought to add Mastodon to the list of examples too, but the README already mentions that Mastodon is undesirable because of the dependence on domain names/administrators (and elsewhere mentions undesirability of running servers by users, of having many servers, while considers simplicity from the point of view of in-browser JS, apparently), that the servers aren't run well, and so on; seems pretty opinionated and enthusiastic about this protocol, so I guess those existing protocols won't satisfy all those requirements either.

Initially restrained from posting it, since it's possibly rather grumpy, and the authors seem to have fun with the protocol, but here it is.

Post reply on HN