6 ms·
I find the nostr[1] protocol to be a nice alternative here. The core idea is the separation of message content from the relays which transport them. So you sign
by sharperguy 3y ago
I find the nostr[1] protocol to be a nice alternative here. The core idea is the separation of message content from the relays which transport them. So you sign a message and publish it to several relays, and then anyone can retrieve your message from any of the relays where it is published.
As opposed to Mastadon, your identity is tied to your pubkey rather than the instance that you created your account on. The difference to Scuttlebutt is the differentiation of relays vs clients, and the lack of chaining messages together in the "blockchain"-like structure.
The result is a fairly simple protocol which is fairly low latency and seamless for many applications compared to other decentralized solutions.
[1]. https://nostr.com/ https://nostr.com/
- api 3y agoI tried nostr but found it hard to find anything except people sending micro transactions to each other and posting memes about Bitcoin.
- anonporridge 3y agoThat's because bitcoiners created it and Jack Dorsey boosted it and abandoned Twitter for it. He's been extremely active there, https://primal.net/jack https://primal.net/jack And the idea of using nano transactions for upvotes has long been an attractive approach in this community for mitigating bot swarms from influencing conversations. In fact, the proof of work system that bitcoin was based on was originally proposed in the 90s as a solution to fight email spam. A micro cost of computation power (or a nano transaction) is neglegible to most legitimate users, but adds up quickly for spammers who depend on sending out thousands of emails for a single hit.
- canadiantim 3y agoIsn't nostr still an append-only solution?
- thinkmassive 3y agoYes, you delete by appending a delete event: https://github.com/nostr-protocol/nips/blob/7d792055372ce1af2205a1451e5e9fa110d73450/09.md https://github.com/nostr-protocol/nips/blob/7d792055372ce1af... Then clients and relays SHOULD act as if the referenced event is deleted. This is different than MUST, probably because there’s no way to guarantee it happens. It’s also possible the delete event doesn’t make it to everywhere that received the initial event.
- hgsgm 3y agoDELETE is never a MUST when it's sent to someone else computer.
- twothamendment 3y agoI demand you delete your comment!
- kevin_thibedeau 3y agoSocial media sites are being siphoned up by various intelligence services, data brokers, quant trading firms. Everything you delete always has a window where it can be permanently recorded by someone. Even on HN. Anything you delete/edit isn't necessarily gone forever, even if it is no longer on the server you posted to.
- bee_rider 3y agoIf I was one of these creepy organizations, “deleted, edited, or not posted” would have to be a pretty strong signal that I might be interested in it.
- yellowapple 3y agoIt's a key reason why I don't attempt to delete social media posts. I've said a lot of stupid shit over the years, and whether I like it or not, that stupid shit is permanent; any attempt to take it down would only serve to make it more interesting and more worthy of preservation. Better to let that stupid shit linger unnoticeably - or even better, embrace that I'm (hopefully) a better person than I was $N years ago. See also: the Streisand effect
- fortuna86 3y agoUsers don't use protocols they use websites. Or more specifically, apps.
- muppetman 3y agoExactly! It's amazing how few people understand this. Signal is the perfect example, there's a lot of technical magic wrapped up it, but my Dad can use it.
- fortuna86 3y agoWhatsapp rolling out e-2-e to its 1b+ users was the most significant move in digital privacy ever, without most users knowing that it even happened.
- numpad0 3y agoThis is 100% true. And all apps goes through App Store approval process, which makes all the censorship talk kind of moot. Sideloading has to become a default, somehow without us returning to antivirus era. Problem is that no one knows how to make that happen.
- fortuna86 3y agoIt's funny how common jailing-breaking iPhones used to be, I did mine immediately when it would come out and everyone else I knew did too. Now I don't know a single person that does.
- numpad0 3y agoYou know what, that’s a great insight. I got the iPod touch precisely because it could be unlocked to be a pocket Unix with shell. 15 years later, it still is and isn’t. Like, lol not at all ha ha. It was a giant, near irrecoverable mistake to computing freedom.
- senkora 3y agoSeems neat. Has anyone written an ActivityPub bridge for nostr?
- thinkmassive 3y agoYes, there’s one called Mostr
- croisillon 3y agoA very apt name for a bridge
- _heimdall 3y ago> Learn about Nostr: A simple, open protocol that enables a truly censorship-resistant and global social network. > Relays are like the backend servers for Nostr. They allow Nostr clients to send them messages, and they may (or may not) store those messages and broadcast those messages to all other connected clients. I still haven't wrapped my head around these two words from the nostr site. How can it be truly censorship-resistant when used are entirely dependant on what their relays decide to store and share?
- numpad0 3y agoMessages are signed locally with entirely local private key, so relays can censor or ban all they like following local laws, without harm to your identity or social graph. Hopefully someone, like a Raspberry Pi cluster on a derelict Soviet military space station on an international orbit, will take your message and relay it, :shrug:, and those messages can still be authenticated by the key. That’s how I understand that part; Nostr uses DNS for blue badges and relay connections so “truly” indeed sound a bit of crypto talk though.
- _heimdall 3y agoDo you know if nostr supports peer to peer messages, or did everything have to go through a relay? If it's all through a relay it probably isn't very censorship resistant at all. My messages may be signed locally but if the network trends towards mob-based bans and censorship like Mastodon as soon as I get on the wrong side of the network I'll be the only one seeing my signed posts
- numpad0 3y agoI believe it's all through relays, there's no peer discovery or even inter-relay meshing. So that could very well could happen. Currently it's just each clients multi-posting to dozen relays and receiving dozen duplicates. What I believe that "censorship resistance" actually means in un-cryptocurrencified talk is, it lets relay operators filter out locally illegal but not globally unethical contents(e.g. political speeches, pornography, certain URLs and strings) without banning users and/or fragmenting the network. And that is an improvement over Mastodon/ActivityPub architecture. But boy those crypto guys knows how to hype it up...
- EGreg 3y agoHow is it different from Secure Scuttlebutt?
- jcarrano 3y agoI don't get why there is no inter-relay communication. From what I read it would just work but it is not allowed for some reason.