Is outbox anywhere close to be included in other clients btw? What about nostr:nprofile1qqsraldwhvwcjgltmxwfu7kw8dqef2692yhzheuurd7k3kfy8cxjdqgpz3mhxue69uhhyetvv9ujuerpd46hxtnfduq3samnwvaz7tmhv4kxxmmdv5hxummnw3ezuamfdejsz9thwden5te0v4jx2m3wdehhxarj9ekxzmnype9f6h and nostr:nprofile1qqs9xtvrphl7p8qnua0gk9zusft33lqjkqqr7cwkr6g8wusu0lle8jcpp3mhxue69uhkyunz9e5k7qg4waehxw309ajkgetw9ehx7um5wghxcctwvsqs6amnwvaz7tmwdaejumr0ds2g5zx8 ? 

 Outbox will make this problem even worse 

 *potentially 

 No it won't. REQs will only have specific authors so tons less bandwidth for more connections. This removes the issue of downloading duplicate notes which is what really kills bandwidth and relay compute . And users don't have to manage any relays 

 True but I still don't see how connecting to a ton of smaller relays from a client will result in user experience matching/exceeding centralized services. My hunch is this will have to be solved server side and with trust 

 I think eventually main way to consume notes will be using relay feeds like what we're working on at wss://algo.utxo.one (you can try at https://jouble.surge.sh/ on desktop)

Pick specific algorithmic feeds vs simply composing chronological follow feeds 

 Awesome! And yes, totally agree 

 Why 3-5? I'm arguing for one relay per user, and probably out of a set of popular ones. When you aggregate relays in an outbox model, you want to connect to as few as possible. The more relays the worse UX. This is how we lose.

An interesting alternative is to have relays that work as aggregators like filter.nostr.wine  

 1 is none 
2 is one
3 is redundancy 

 Because of different relay types and use cases for each kind. Ie inbox, outbox, search, backup, and private. 

 Sure. I am referring to relays to write notes to 

 I gotchu. I would then say that 2-3 would be good for most then. Most people would want a backup, anti-rug proof. 

 But there’s like a thousand, which 3-5 to pick?