then you could re-use every kind used in the open "normal" nostr.
A calendar event, or a coinjoin event is the same kind, inside or outside the group.
There is no issue that such events will be displayed outside the group because they are encrypted, and unsigned, right?
The other day I was trying to buy some tickets with CC. My god it was horrible.
Had to input my entire life, a DNA sample, tried it 3-4 times, each time I needed to receive fucking SMSs for 2FA...
mmm. They are the same method, but the second is more efficient in practice because the libraries for matrix multiplication are highly optimized in basically all languages.
However, one should be careful in using efficient sparse matrices representations (like CSR), otherwise the power method might use more memory.
@cloud fodder and @straycat, the number of iteration to reach convergence (~10^-6 tollerance) for pagerank is roughly 100.
Why do you perform only 8 iterations?
Hey frens, someone familiar with Redis here? #asknostr
I am looking to use Redis to store millions of random walks, which are nothing more complex that an ordered array of numbers e.g. [0,1,2,3,4,5].
I've read the Docs about data structures, but I am still unsure whether I should store them as Redis strings e.g. "0,1,2,3,4,5", or as Redis Lists.
Lists seem more appropriate, however I know they are implemented using skip lists, which I feel would be a waste of memory since the operations I will need to do are simply GETALL and SET. I've read somewhere that, if the size of the list is lower than a specified parameter, they aren't implemented using skip lists but normal arrays, which are more memory efficient. To give some context, the size of the walk on average will be 7, and with overwhelming probability not longer than 100.
What do u think is best in my situation? Any advice or feedback is appreciated
Thanks for the answer. Yeah the more I think about it, the more this seems the easiest solution. Currently I am storing it as "0,1,2,3,4,5", which makes debugging easier. Then as I said, I can encode it more efficiently in binary.
I've just bought tickets for an F1 quali. Maaan, paying with cards online is DISGUSTING.
Absolute clusterfuck of input this, connect by doing a 0€ transaction, pay, input that, receive code by SMS.. Fuck fiat!
I think mints are similar to relays. Using few big relays is fastest, and if we all do it there is very low probability of missing some posts.
Same with mints, if we use few big ones it's fastest and we have lower fees (as most transactions would be intra-mint).
However, if we look at the current distribution of users per relay it's pretty good (plot from nostr.band)
Why is that?
The advantage of using multiple relays is lower probability of censorship.
Similarly, the advantage of using multiple mints is lower probability of rugs. Also, with mints there is an anti-centralisation influence, because you don't want to use the biggest mints as there is more chance of big rugs from the gov or hacks.
So I would say there is decent evidence that the distribution of mints will be more flat than that of relays.
https://image.nostr.build/9e05dbd414118bb74e9b0d1e43bd8cffede8db74bf0649350081f64bc5de725b.jpg
a post on potential user-per-mints distribution
nostr:nevent1qqs0dkg6hn3tl9lnkgwdqrnyqxlte7ncf30kulelusqk5tzz0qr8h7gpzamhxue69uhhyetvv9ujuurjd9kkzmpwdejhgtczyrmg86rsxhm66n6yuzuce77e2dlpv326jtxn3nhufje3md640a00yqcyqqqqqqgwyvnch
fair. It should be automagic like auto-selecting the first 20 mint based on their reputation to you, but yeah, reputation here should not be follows.
follows filter spam, which is the first step, but then you need something else. Like reviews! 🤣
There is a nip for which mints you recommend, but not one for which mint you use (which has many privacy implications)
There is a danger of feedback loop, yes, however keep in mind that your trending mints are going to be different, and possibly very different from mines, because it's personalised!
I agree community helps with these things, totally.
Another aspect to consider is that in the future reputation is going to become much more important, so who you give your attention to or who you recommend is going to be used to judge you. Trending towards anarchy requires personal responsibility and stricter societal norms, so I agree with you pointing out these problems, but I think they will become smaller in the future (still a lot of work to solve them in a convincing way)
I think mints are similar to relays. Using few big relays is fastest, and if we all do it there is very low probability of missing some posts.
Same with mints, if we use few big ones it's fastest and we have lower fees (as most transactions would be intra-mint).
However, if we look at the current distribution of users per relay it's pretty good (plot from nostr.band)
Why is that?
The advantage of using multiple relays is lower probability of censorship.
Similarly, the advantage of using multiple mints is lower probability of rugs. Also, with mints there is an anti-centralisation influence, because you don't want to use the biggest mints as there is more chance of big rugs from the gov or hacks.
So I would say there is decent evidence that the distribution of mints will be more flat than that of relays.
https://image.nostr.build/9e05dbd414118bb74e9b0d1e43bd8cffede8db74bf0649350081f64bc5de725b.jpg
nostr:nprofile1qqs2js6wu9j76qdjs6lvlsnhrmchqhf4xlg9rvu89zyf3nqq6hygt0spz9mhxue69uhkummnw3ezuamfdejj7qghwaehxw309aex2mrp0yhxummnw3ezucnpdejz7qg4waehxw309aex2mrp0yhxgctdw4eju6t09uygje4n and I (and others) talked about this idea at NostRiga.
Proof of membership. There is a public member list (in this case that's the relay-based-community list) and you want to prove your npub is part of that list without revealing to the verifier which npub u are.
There is a way to do it by using zero-knowledge sets, however my understanding is limited. It should be similar to (and simpler than?) the work nostr:nprofile1qqsxwkuyle67y94tj378gw8w2xw2wa6nwmwlqhddlwnz0z7sztsaw2qppemhxue69uhkummn9ekx7mp0su9alh is doing (tldr; prove that I own UTXOs that exceed the value of X sats, without revealing with ones)
the zap would have been a better option. Or even adding
"Buy shipping EU/USA/..." as a product on Geyser.
Anyway, I did it with onchain, but had to swap in and out a couple of times. Fortunately fees are low
the UX of nostr:nprofile1qqs9ajjs5p904ml92evlkayppdpx2n3zdrq6ejnw2wqphxrzmd62swspzemhxue69uhhyetvv9ujuvrcvd5xzapwvdhk6qgdwaehxw309aukzcn49ekk2qghwaehxw309aex2mrp0yh8x6tpd4ehgu3wvdhk6ynf30t is perhaps the best in nostr. Kudos
I can totally see this mechanism being integrated into a nice business model.
E.g. a company offering banks and lenders these proofs for certain users that want to use their services.
Or, some form of "proof of rich" in digital identities. Bots can't easily accumulate wealth
For this particular usecase, I am not super bullish because:
1. micro payments (ecash, lightning) allow services to monetize directly. This was not possible before due to a technical limitation, so businesses got creative and explored a whole bunch of indirect monetization avenues.
2. even for public and free services, something simpler like running pagerank-ish algos (pagerank, personalized pagerank, trustrank...) on the follow graph/zap graph would do the job.
Btw I am actually building 2.
There is defo a place for "proof of rich" in identity. For example giving a free luxury service only to rich people. E.g. try this yacht for free!
Everyone would enjoy a free day on the see, so the business must filter.
Super interesting comments.
> Crossing mints means more complexity and trust issues maybe? But again, you can imagine niches where it might be ideal.
nostr:nprofile1qqs9pk20ctv9srrg9vr354p03v0rrgsqkpggh2u45va77zz4mu5p6ccpz4mhxue69uhhyetvv9ujuerpd46hxtnfduhsz9thwden5te0dehhxarj9ehhsarj9ejx2a30qyg8wumn8ghj7mn0wd68ytnddakj7xph5zr some time ago shared the "multi nut payment" or some other silly 🥜 name :)
The idea is that you can have your wealth spread across 1000s of mints, while still being able to pay a single lightning invoice. Just wanted to share that in case u didn't know.
Another very practical observation on the limit of the privacy of your scheme (which, don't get me wrong I find really interesting):
The person has to own an UTXO. Not many people today own an UTXO, so the anonset is already much smaller than the whole world. And for the future, well that'll probably remain small because of the onchain fees.
exited for it 🔥
nostr:nevent1qqs92vwt83v4u0ggth29x2pwsz7ssg3s0v4r2rl934vza9lp0gfg2zcppemhxue69uhkummn9ekx7mp0qgspwwwexlwgcrrnwz4zwkze8rq3ncjug8mvgsd96dxx6wzs8ccndmcrqsqqqqqp5hh7n0
extraordinary work 🔥
nostr:nevent1qqspc8dhx9yz7hdjypl8w3zfv86dwxrvtu4j46rhewk9qvpdg4ry4ucpzamhxue69uhhyetvv9ujuurjd9kkzmpwdejhgtczyz55xnhpvhksrv5xhm8uyac779c96dfh6pgm8peg3zvvcqx4ezzmuqcyqqqqqqg507p7m
I think nostr:nprofile1qqsf03c2gsmx5ef4c9zmxvlew04gdh7u94afnknp33qvv3c94kvwxgspz3mhxue69uhhyetvv9ujuerpd46hxtnfduq35amnwvaz7tmjv4kxz7fwwajhxar9wfhxyarr9e3k7mgprdmhxue69uhksmmyd33x7epwvdhhyctrd3jjuar0dak8x6lmt90 and you Niel should do this together.
I can totally see your church ditching Facebook when they'll see something amazing like ZapChat!
the end goal is a partially verifiable WoT computation as a service.
The comparison to the current basic 2-hop WoT:
- It's a service, so there is more trust involved, but minimal due to client side verifications.
- It's fast and efficient. We do the computation for you
- It's real time. Every time something changes, everything gets recomputed. This means it's more secure (think of the case of a popular npub that gets hacked).
- It mantains the same spam prevention, but give you more reach than just two hops.
yes, that's the plan.
However it requires some infrastructure as it has to have a graph database, and an in-memory database. Details still to be defined, but it's defo not going to be click a button and deploy.
Oddbean new post about login | logout
Notes by pippellia | export