Oddbean

As you know, I'm not the most savvy about all this but I kind of feel like there's some putting of the proverbial cart before the horse... build your cart, let the horse grow strong. There's lots to do & only so many to do it. I haven't seen a single project or attempt to solve a problem that doesn't have a legitimate usecase.

Yeah, I'm just seeing these complex structures being built for the most complex (but popular case). I don't think I'm asking for anything vastly new than whatever exists, but find it rediculous that devs are stuck on corralling the most complex situation to something that i see as already baked in. Relays and clients are seen as separate things and so anyone that wants to create their own community needs to first use a single relay, create a new account and then white list it at the relay level. I really think the process can be easier. Sure we as a group are working on it, but it shouldn't be just us.

nostr:nprofile1qqs2js6wu9j76qdjs6lvlsnhrmchqhf4xlg9rvu89zyf3nqq6hygt0spzemhxue69uhhyetvv9ujuvrcvd5xzapwvdhk6qgdwaehxw309aukzcn49ekk2qghwaehxw309aex2mrp0yh8x6tpd4ehgu3wvdhk6ya985f & nostr:nprofile1qqsza748zkamgmw4he4hm2xhwqpxd5gkwju38wqh3twmtshx8kv8xvgpzamhxue69uhhyetvv9ujumn0wd68ytnzv9hxgtcpz9mhxue69uhkummnw3ezuamfdejj7qgwwaehxw309ahx7uewd3hkctcktxuf5 feel you both have a bit to add to the conversation would love both your thoughts

Nostr offers the ability to publish in multiple communities (think publication houses) at once. That is the game changer for me and means you do not have the false choice anymore between blasting your content out to the universe or publishing in a surgical community where the admin can rug you. With nip-29 you can publish in any niche community that: 1. Overlaps with your contents topic/goal 2. You're willing to pay the price for 3. You're following the guidelines/rules of Creating a high signal online world with organic discovery (and reporting) built in: nostr:naddr1qqfyyet9wdqhye2rv9cxjarpd35hxarnqgs2js6wu9j76qdjs6lvlsnhrmchqhf4xlg9rvu89zyf3nqq6hygt0srqsqqqa287ywmff

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

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

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.

It's more about the situation where you want to have your own echo chamber and move across clients. You're not doing that with your normal account right now becaus you have your relay set which will follow you around any client. Basically wide open all the time. If you want your echo chamber you'd need a new account to log in to so that way you get a smaller feed because that account is only connnected to one relay. Sure, /theoretically/ you can do that with a normal account to post your kind1 notes but you'd have to manually set your relays each time you want to change the scope which is a user nightmare. Computationally this should be a simple task though, which I relate as very similar to how Amethyst's can change feeds with lists or hashtags. If that is the most basic functionality that is already covers massive ground.

Its a few steps but I think user nightmare is a bit strong of terminology for it.😅 It could be simplified for reading, but writing is super easy. And where does hopping clients come into this? Each should have various purposes... is there anything that prevents a client from being developed that respects your relay list but only actually reads from specified choices? Or accepts only certain event types, sort of like Fountain is working towards? Do you think a lack of support comes from that this concept isn't conducive to strengthening censorship-resistence more broadly, given the current state of relays & connection? Because, really I should be able to write this reply to my own relay & no other, but if I did you likely wouldn't see it, as things stand. (I mean, you *might* but really you should no matter what) Again... I'm just thinking it's too early yet. But maybe I'm missing something?