Some deep diving to figure out what its all in service of, rather than looking at the immediate things you need to do, or what they're a means to an end of. See if there are more direct paths you can take 🫂
> multitasker extraordinare
Not relatable at all 🫣😅
Constraints help focus inspiration vs the intimidation brought by a blank page. Maybe pulling back, removing everything non essential for a while some to have some recalibration. See how you feel then and then bring back more things into your life.
You's a vibe nostr:nprofile1qqsfeg9aw3g8gtt2yqcecr3af3nee8syd2wuwr5w74wzjp0zgpfrgzcpr3mhxue69uhhyetvv9uju6rfva5xc6t8dp6x2u3wvdhk6tcpzamhxue69uhhyetvv9ujumn0wd68ytnzv9hxgtcpz4mhxue69uhhyetvv9ujuerpd46hxtnfduhsxfltls 🙂↕️😎🐝
Such beautiful art nostr:nprofile1qqs0fk6jwz7ejxchh6s7d5p473w7uwffr8pfga9m4sgrgtfz836wp5qppemhxue69uhkummn9ekx7mp0qyghwumn8ghj7mn0wd68ytnhd9hx2tcpz4mhxue69uhhyetvv9ujuerpd46hxtnfduhsd9gmxe! The moment i have the capacity i'll be getting one 🙏
Speaking of "potential cost savings". I can't ever see how this could go wrong:
nostr:nevent1qqswqufstc5wnfhl5uc34frghafwe6rnvqa5nkxl39tc0lafyt5s6uspr4mhxue69uhkummnw3ezucnfw33k76twv4ezuum0vd5kzmp0qgsdcnxssmxheed3sv4d7n7azggj3xyq6tr799dukrngfsq6emnhcpsrqsqqqqqp5m3qfa
Yeah Obsidian uses markdown, so the plugin would connect to relays and publish the file you have or also a short note. I saw that there's a video demonstration. Wish there was an emacs version 😅
> It is a story as old as time. A stubborn, shell-dwelling, and melodramatic vimmer—envious of the features of modern text editors—spirals into despair before he succumbs to the dark side. This is his config
Doom emacs' tagline 😆
The other use case is to break apart long documents (textbooks for example, or youtube lectures) by section/chapter/etc to make them easily searchable. Videos and podcasts can be easily turned into articles through genAI, the hard part is extracting images like diagrams from the video to pair with the text - but its in progress.
Same thing with survivorship bias. Sure everyone successful has unique experiences that he|p lead to success - but its all about taxis of meaning. You're in a swampy space trying to move to a goal, some places are more swampy blocking you from reaching your goal. You either swim through or swim around. If you maneuver well enough, changing your local goals as you face different obsticles, you will continually get closer to maximal meaning. Key point, maximal meaning is not a place, but a long term direction, but locally you imagine it as a place.
I think about the paper "How Learning Guides Evolution". A seminal paper in AI and evolution. Some background info that I hope doesn't muddy up the original topic. The idea is that you have a complex 'fitness landscape' with various hills, and you have agents that are initialized in various locations of this landscape through their genetics and use "learning" to climb up these hills during their lifetime. Learning uses local information to climb up hills and reach the maximum fitness, but they can only do so within a lifetime. The idea is that learning helps you find the trajectory given your starting point but is forgotten after death, and that evolution converges on selecting the agents that have learned and climbed the most, because they started in positions best suited for climbing. What happens collectively, is that the population over generations collectively climbs higher and higher because of this selection criteria.
How this relates is that all individuals collectively move to better situations over time over generations. In practice, is the divide getting larger between populations at the top of the hill and those near the bottom? Sure, but we are all going through the same process of hill climbing. What is the goal? Meaning maximization, we use sub goals to get there to help us frame where we want to go "Be successful", "have a family", "Become a teacher", "be the next Steve Jobs". These goals of success are all in service of meaning maximization. The starting conditions for everyone are different, but so are the end goals because whatever it looks like will be different due to the individuals path, experience and the needs of the end situation. Regardless, we collectively try to move in that direction because we see it as a "better situation than now".
So, just to sum up - we try to define end goals (like success), but they are always in service of meaning maximization. If you know the direction for meaning maximization, it doesn't matter how exact the end goal is like "Be the next Steve Jobs" because it will always be different, but if you are maximizing your meaning it really doesn't matter because what you are doing will be the most meaningful for you. Hope I didn't get too off track 😅
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
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.
10,000 hours of monotonous repetition vs 1,000 hours of flow-state augmented practice. Loved Steven Kotler and Jamie Wheel's Rise of Superman book regarding that topic as well.
nostr:nprofile1qqsx8zd7vjg70d5na8ek3m8g3lx3ghc8cp5d9sdm4epy0wd4aape6vspzpmhxue69uhkummnw3ezuamfdejsz9thwden5te0v4jx2m3wdehhxarj9ekxzmnyqyv8wumn8ghj7un9d3shjtnddakk7um5wgh8q6twdvt4w07n you wanna schedule a chat this or next week? Not sure how clear i can explain the ideas I have, but I think it'll be a nice convo 🤙🧠
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_coefficienthttps://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
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_coefficienthttps://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Small-world_network
nostr:nevent1qqs0dnc3z0a69gmeg3r58ktna0ys78jpyxan7p2hrjkzgmwec8ylk9cpzamhxue69uhhyetvv9ujuurjd9kkzmpwdejhgtczyrwye5yxe47wtvvr9t05lhgjzy5f3qxjcl3ft09su6zvqxkwua7qvqcyqqqqqqgpetnwe
Nostr as it stands is a soup with too many cooks. Segregate the communities, build your echo chambers and flourish in isolation without individuals who you struggle communicating with.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QrGrOK8oZG8
I mean, GitCitadel headed in that direction. But we shouldn't be the only ones. We're not even funded. Just seems like the most straightforward way to tackle community security but any group based feature is a Rube Goldberg machine of complexity. Let people isolate themselves because they want to be safe from harassment or community vandalism.
women on nostr want to form a group to chat without men? Yes please! Users dedicated to using your client that speak in ways cohesive to you? By all means! Specialized group wanting an interoperable community with other communities? Of course.
Have white list relays to connect to pull in from select relays for your feed and not broadcast your notes to all relays at once.
Reports actually incentivize relay operators to do something about bad behavior and relay operators get paid for the quality of the moderation for their community.
consider the cases in levels of complexity:
0) minimal base case for nostr is 1 person sending their notes to 1 relay.
1) 20 people white listed to a relay. Their feed it literally one relay and the people connected to it.
2) 2 communities with similar values sharing posts from relays
3) (nostr how everyone uses it) individuals with tens of relays to broadcast to and anyone at the intersections see posts.
The subreddit nip, whatever it is operates at level 3. That's fine but i think we should focus on 1 and 2.
Private groups can work with level 1 without cryptography. Anything more open is a gradient from level 2 to 3.
If you just select a relay to post to for a given condition, thats not even a nip - the functionality already comes baked in with how nostr works right now. Clients just make relay selection an afterthought.
The point is that nostr can encompass any level of openness you care for. it doesn't need to be wide open all the time. From that, centralized social media's or the fediverse's functionality is a subset of what nostr can do - with even simpler implementation.
We already have private and paid relays, but they are just thrown into the soup without any differentiation.
The additional benifit is that your identity and followers don't need to be tethered to a single server like centralized social media or the fediverse. It is a gradient of optionality.
I'm happy with starting outbas the entire show and letting users navigate to their communities. Reddit has "the entire show" with their popular subreddit. You can have a freeforall relay thats fine don't let this conversation discourage that. But nostr does not need to be "just" the entire show. The capabilities already exist but are an after thought.
Cc nostr:nprofile1qqsr9cvzwc652r4m83d86ykplrnm9dg5gwdvzzn8ameanlvut35wy3gprpmhxue69uhhwetvvdhk6efwdehhxarj9emkjmn9qyxhwumn8ghj7mn0wvhxcmmvqyg8wumn8ghj7mn0wd68ytnhd9hx2yhtlun & nostr:nprofile1qqsw3znfr6vdnxrujezjrhlkqqjlvpcqx79ys7gcph9mkjjsy7zsgygpz4mhxue69uhhyetvv9ujuerpd46hxtnfduhsz8thwden5te0dehhxarj9ekh2arfdeuhwctvd3jhgtnrdakj7qgkwaehxw309ajkgetw9ehx7um5wghxcctwvshspg7dju please explain why you left the fediverse.
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
> 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
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.
Oddbean new post about login | logout
Notes by liminal | export