Oddbean new post about login | logout The entire point of relays is that they are replaceable: unless you can self host a relay (hard) you can’t really trust any. We need to focus more on making it accessible to the average user to create a community without being beholden to a relay host that can terminate their relay and in a more affordable way than paying a lot for a relay
i think that relays using other relays as layer 2 event stores is the way to go for this, and it meshes well with users with subscriptions and peers on a post-paid system if they pull more than they send
making the assumption that relays are fungible is just not a valid assumption in the current state of the network, also, nostr:nprofile1qyt8wumn8ghj76rfwd6zumn0wd68ytnvv9hxgtcppemhxue69uhkummn9ekx7mp0qyvhwumn8ghj7un9d3shjtnwdaehw6r9wfjjucm0d5hsz9thwden5te0wfjkccte9ejxzmt4wvhxjme0qyghwumn8ghj7mn0wd68ytnvv9hxgtcqypftfgrkhjammsap4marwdvpdnm5nya3hrdjq2cpezputzl8ltvt6lmlag9 : there is no NIP for data replication, and that would break one of the most important NON-specifications of the protocol
> relays are replacable which is one of the reasons that they're not getting any attention or funding even though they are the backbone of nostr. Relays allow to be blacklist based, whitelist based or any mix of that. This is only arguing for relays that bias themselves to being more white listed, allowing them to decide on their own rules of engagement. Nothing is being taken away. Nostr acts as diffusion of information. I am all for that and am here because of that feature. Broadcast to any reachable relay to get your information out. Outbox is great, but i argue that this is the maximal situation and we can encourage more small world infrastructure (small world networks being lots of connections in hubs i,e the damus relay, while sparser connectivity in non hubs like private group relays). NIP01 has been touted more or less as being the only requirement for "nostr", and this is just sticking to that ethos. we can reel things back, have pockets of high activity in wide open relays where everything goes and pockets of activity with focused discussion. all this is towards advocating for more of a loose sense of community and conversational security. As it stands, there is no expectation of that. Reports exist but there is no incentive for acting on it. Closed off communities actually encourage both users and relay operators to keep the space clean. Something like this will actually make search and organization easier - because your searching and retreiving from a smaller, topic specifc set of relays from the set you have selected (like a car enthusiast set of relays) If everything is wide open, I understand how and why there is pushback on expecting a curated feed. What i'm advocating is an ability to fine tune the knobs of openness from the relay side and the ability to specifically send your data somewhere on the user side. Let the data flow and diffuse out to all areas through free-for-all no moderation relays, but also let pockets of organization and structure come from the areas that have walls up (white lists). We all get in through global somehow, and your follows list is just a smaller global, same thing with these segregated communities - the global is the 200 or so people connected to 5 relays that share similar values and topics, and your follow is an even narrower version of that community - but now global is actually palatable. then the other point - if you think of only nostr as the prebiotic soup and everything is wide open I get why there is pushback for on NIPs on nostr of course you can't get concensus with nips on 200 relays where anyone can comment or fork. I get "just use mastadon or twitter if you want moderation". It doesn't need to be that way 100% of the time though. you can have your nostrnipsrepo.com client that only points to one relay that you and a few others have write access to. Let that be the defacto place for the rules for anyone wanting to look at the spec. Those messages, while not writable to that relay are still broadcastable to other relays which can be commented on and edited in any way possible - just not by those who care about only the "official" specs. A dev can also watch for changes on the relay and broadcast to their own relay, where conversations specific to that dev's project and nips implementations can take place. Rant over, thanks for listening.
I see nip29 and if that's what it takes - i'm for it. however, looking at the levels of complexity (read heterogeneity in users/relays) i see a very simple solution requiring ittle modification because its already baked in: nostr:nevent1qqszggrwxt62rtc2xd5lywhlcvj0fah7mune9l6um62jjzds77y989qpr4mhxue69uhkummnw3ezucnfw33k76twv4ezuum0vd5kzmp0qgsdcnxssmxheed3sv4d7n7azggj3xyq6tr799dukrngfsq6emnhcpsrqsqqqqqpce02ea and nostr:nevent1qqstq5j2qhem2hjfmjgdfjlcr3rsjeu8ruuhd253th80h7npznlqlpgpr3mhxue69uhhg6r9vd5hgctyv4kzumn0wd68yvfwvdhk6tczyrwye5yxe47wtvvr9t05lhgjzy5f3qxjcl3ft09su6zvqxkwua7qvqcyqqqqqqgpud8qd
Look up small-world networks and what "Rich clubs" are. tell me that nostr doesn't have this property on relays. It already exists. I'm advocating we exploit this feature for more segregated communities. NOT EVERYTHING NEEDS TO BE SUPER CONNECTED because IT ALREADY IS LIKE THAT. One of the most natural network structures that come up. Small hubs with small connections, rich clubs with massive connections. It comes up because due to natural constraints on resources. On nostr, our attention is a limited resource and exploiting this structure helps us move toward the signal activity that means most to us. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rich-club_coefficient https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Small-world_network nostr:nevent1qqs0dnc3z0a69gmeg3r58ktna0ys78jpyxan7p2hrjkzgmwec8ylk9cpzamhxue69uhhyetvv9ujuurjd9kkzmpwdejhgtczyrwye5yxe47wtvvr9t05lhgjzy5f3qxjcl3ft09su6zvqxkwua7qvqcyqqqqqqgpetnwe
I didn't catch up on the whole discussion, but the way I see it, they're (just) project groups
My gripe is that devs are trying to work with the most complex situation for groups, both public and private - which is known to be a mess. I'm arguing that we get more or less the same functionality with a simpler implementation because it is already baked into the functionality of nostr itself. The problem I'm seeing is that the UX is not there, but the most basic functionality is how Amethyst has different feeds for hashtags and lists. A 'community' can be one relay or multiple, but the only criteria is that they have similar values, either in topic or in moderation. "Scale of complexity" just means how mixed everything is. For example your global is the highest complexity. Your follower count is just a smaller global because your feed is just who you follow, but anyone can comment. The same property applies if you are just one user posting to 5 relays about beekeeping because thats the community you want to cultivate. The 50 relay global can't cultivate a beekeeping community because anyone can jump in the conversation. Right @7fqx? (please add a name or 7fqx, I want to tag you 🥹) nostr:nevent1qqszggrwxt62rtc2xd5lywhlcvj0fah7mune9l6um62jjzds77y989qpr9mhxue69uhkymm4de3k2u3wdehhxarjv4jjumt99uq3vamnwvaz7tm9v3jkutnwdaehgu3wd3skuep0qy88wumn8ghj7mn0wvhxcmmv9ungxxum
so like Git Citadel goes into nip29 and a thematic community doesn't need it, it uses group/communities/list/tags/subject and chooses 2 or three relays to write to. The problem with the lists is that you read everything about those profiles, in the chat there is moderation but they can come from anywhere, then the chat is not available in many apps
I was wondering if people could tag me lol. I could go back to having a name. I do like being an npub tho lol 🤔
Relay feeds you say? Like this that I'm trying to advocate for? Apologies for the wall of text - been strongly advocating for it the past few days. nostr:nevent1qqs0dnc3z0a69gmeg3r58ktna0ys78jpyxan7p2hrjkzgmwec8ylk9cpr4mhxue69uhkummnw3ezucnfw33k76twv4ezuum0vd5kzmp0qgsdcnxssmxheed3sv4d7n7azggj3xyq6tr799dukrngfsq6emnhcpsrqsqqqqqpyhwwp8
I don't know if I get what you're saying because it's too many words, but essentially I agree. NIP-29 is different, it's for more closed groups, they deserve a separate client even, very different from the "public square" microblogging use case of Nostr. Relay feeds and dedicated or niche relays, on the other hand, would fit well in the normal microblogging use case.
The use case i imagine, open to watch but permissioned to write communities. Facilitated by relay feeds. group A, group B, write to their own set of white listed relays independent of each other. Conversational and communtity "security". Group C pulls in events from both group A and B, comments on their content and extends the work done, but only on their relays while A and B can do whatever they want without being intruded on or having their signal muddied by thousands of forks, edits and comments they don't care about.
I didn't catch up on the whole discussion, but the way I see it, they're (just) project groups
My gripe is that devs are trying to work with the most complex situation for groups, both public and private - which is known to be a mess. I'm arguing that we get more or less the same functionality with a simpler implementation because it is already baked into the functionality of nostr itself. The problem I'm seeing is that the UX is not there, but the most basic functionality is how Amethyst has different feeds for hashtags and lists. A 'community' can be one relay or multiple, but the only criteria is that they have similar values, either in topic or in moderation. "Scale of complexity" just means how mixed everything is. For example your global is the highest complexity. Your follower count is just a smaller global because your feed is just who you follow, but anyone can comment. The same property applies if you are just one user posting to 5 relays about beekeeping because thats the community you want to cultivate. The 50 relay global can't cultivate a beekeeping community because anyone can jump in the conversation. Right @7fqx? (please add a name or 7fqx, I want to tag you 🥹) nostr:nevent1qqszggrwxt62rtc2xd5lywhlcvj0fah7mune9l6um62jjzds77y989qpr9mhxue69uhkymm4de3k2u3wdehhxarjv4jjumt99uq3vamnwvaz7tm9v3jkutnwdaehgu3wd3skuep0qy88wumn8ghj7mn0wvhxcmmv9ungxxum
so like Git Citadel goes into nip29 and a thematic community doesn't need it, it uses group/communities/list/tags/subject and chooses 2 or three relays to write to. The problem with the lists is that you read everything about those profiles, in the chat there is moderation but they can come from anywhere, then the chat is not available in many apps
I was wondering if people could tag me lol. I could go back to having a name. I do like being an npub tho lol 🤔
My gripe is that devs are trying to work with the most complex situation for groups, both public and private - which is known to be a mess. I'm arguing that we get more or less the same functionality with a simpler implementation because it is already baked into the functionality of nostr itself. The problem I'm seeing is that the UX is not there, but the most basic functionality is how Amethyst has different feeds for hashtags and lists. A 'community' can be one relay or multiple, but the only criteria is that they have similar values, either in topic or in moderation. "Scale of complexity" just means how mixed everything is. For example your global is the highest complexity. Your follower count is just a smaller global because your feed is just who you follow, but anyone can comment. The same property applies if you are just one user posting to 5 relays about beekeeping because thats the community you want to cultivate. The 50 relay global can't cultivate a beekeeping community because anyone can jump in the conversation. Right @7fqx? (please add a name or 7fqx, I want to tag you 🥹) nostr:nevent1qqszggrwxt62rtc2xd5lywhlcvj0fah7mune9l6um62jjzds77y989qpr9mhxue69uhkymm4de3k2u3wdehhxarjv4jjumt99uq3vamnwvaz7tm9v3jkutnwdaehgu3wd3skuep0qy88wumn8ghj7mn0wvhxcmmv9ungxxum
so like Git Citadel goes into nip29 and a thematic community doesn't need it, it uses group/communities/list/tags/subject and chooses 2 or three relays to write to. The problem with the lists is that you read everything about those profiles, in the chat there is moderation but they can come from anywhere, then the chat is not available in many apps
I was wondering if people could tag me lol. I could go back to having a name. I do like being an npub tho lol 🤔
I was wondering if people could tag me lol. I could go back to having a name. I do like being an npub tho lol 🤔
Relay feeds you say? Like this that I'm trying to advocate for? Apologies for the wall of text - been strongly advocating for it the past few days. nostr:nevent1qqs0dnc3z0a69gmeg3r58ktna0ys78jpyxan7p2hrjkzgmwec8ylk9cpr4mhxue69uhkummnw3ezucnfw33k76twv4ezuum0vd5kzmp0qgsdcnxssmxheed3sv4d7n7azggj3xyq6tr799dukrngfsq6emnhcpsrqsqqqqqpyhwwp8
I don't know if I get what you're saying because it's too many words, but essentially I agree. NIP-29 is different, it's for more closed groups, they deserve a separate client even, very different from the "public square" microblogging use case of Nostr. Relay feeds and dedicated or niche relays, on the other hand, would fit well in the normal microblogging use case.
The use case i imagine, open to watch but permissioned to write communities. Facilitated by relay feeds. group A, group B, write to their own set of white listed relays independent of each other. Conversational and communtity "security". Group C pulls in events from both group A and B, comments on their content and extends the work done, but only on their relays while A and B can do whatever they want without being intruded on or having their signal muddied by thousands of forks, edits and comments they don't care about.