Conversation

Notices

1. Embed this notice
   mikedilger (ee11a5dff40c19a555f41fe42b48f00e618c91225622ae37b6c2bb67b76c4e49@mostr.pub)'s status on Sunday, 24-Mar-2024 07:07:06 JST mikedilger

   • Alex Gleason
   • fiatjaf
   ON BLASTR:
   
   The main problem I have with blastr (@5be6446a) is that it works too well. So well that lots of nostr software is broken and the developers don't even know it is broken because blastr fixes it for them. It is like everybody is riding their bicycles with training wheels on, and we don't have a clear idea who what software would fall over if the training wheels came off.
   
   If events were not being copied (at least for a while) then the community of devs could find and fix the insufficiencies. But is that a pipe dream?
   
   Secondarily, I don't like the inefficiencies of copying events all over the place and I think that won't scale as nostr grows. But that is a self-correcting problem.
   
   ON THE INBOX MODEL:
   
   Outbox model is now also being challenged by "inbox model" (https://github.com/nostr-protocol/nips/discussions/1134, https://github.com/nostr-protocol/nips/pull/1135). I think these relay usage patterns can co-exist.
   
   These models of following people have different properties. Compared to the outbox model, the inbox model has these properties:
   
   * The publisher improves their reach by pushing their events to many relays
   * It is easy to see and count who is following the publisher
   * The publisher can cut you off, and you cannot follow someone secretly under this model
   * Readers only have to read from their own approved relays, not random ones they might not trust. This might also be nice for power-limited phones.
   * Worse overhead because events are copied to all the recipient relays, which might be a lot of copies.
   * It is not clear where reactions and replies go, or if everybody participating in a converstaion sees the reactions/replies of everybody else participating
   
   @3bf0c63f
   @alex
   • Embed this notice
     Alex Gleason (alex@gleasonator.com)'s status on Sunday, 24-Mar-2024 07:07:05 JST Alex Gleason

     in reply to

     • fiatjaf
     @ee11a5dff40c19a555f41fe42b48f00e618c91225622ae37b6c2bb67b76c4e49 @3bf0c63fcb93463407af97a5e5ee64fa883d107ef9e558472c4eb9aaaefa459d @5be6446aa8a31c11b3b453bf8dafc9b346ff328d1fa11a0fa02a1e6461f6a9b1 > The publisher can cut you off, and you cannot follow someone secretly under this model
     
     This is actually the reason ActivityPub chose to do it. This is a feature, not a bug, to them.
     
     Inbox and outbox need to coexist to get all the benefits of Nostr.
   • Embed this notice
     fiatjaf (3bf0c63fcb93463407af97a5e5ee64fa883d107ef9e558472c4eb9aaaefa459d@mostr.pub)'s status on Sunday, 24-Mar-2024 22:15:41 JST fiatjaf

     in reply to

     • Alex Gleason
     They must still have an outbox relay unless they really want to not get their message out in the world for all to see -- which is the default behavior for people who use Twitter and so on.
   • Embed this notice
     mikedilger (ee11a5dff40c19a555f41fe42b48f00e618c91225622ae37b6c2bb67b76c4e49@mostr.pub)'s status on Sunday, 24-Mar-2024 22:15:41 JST mikedilger

     in reply to

     • Alex Gleason
     • fiatjaf
     Someone might have a paid newsletter that is only delivered to private inboxes, each copy watermarked so they can determine if anybody leaked it and cancel that subscription.
     Alex Gleason likes this.
   • Embed this notice
     mikedilger (ee11a5dff40c19a555f41fe42b48f00e618c91225622ae37b6c2bb67b76c4e49@mostr.pub)'s status on Sunday, 24-Mar-2024 22:15:42 JST mikedilger

     in reply to

     • Alex Gleason
     • fiatjaf
     Well, if someone doesn't publish a kind-10002 and instead publishes an inbox model thing, I can still secretly follow them using the gossip model (which may be by following them on one of their followers' relays)
   • Embed this notice
     fiatjaf (3bf0c63fcb93463407af97a5e5ee64fa883d107ef9e558472c4eb9aaaefa459d@mostr.pub)'s status on Monday, 25-Mar-2024 05:21:59 JST fiatjaf

     in reply to

     • Alex Gleason
     Outbox model is not being challenged, I still think outbox model should be the de facto standard, but it can be complemented. I don't think anyone should implement a thing that just does the inbox model, that would be very limiting -- i.e. you would never be able to follow anyone who doesn't do the publish-to-inbox flow on their side.
     
     But I guess you could have a third-party service automatically forwarding stuff from outboxes to inboxes. Is there a risk to doing this?
     Alex Gleason likes this.