I still think relay-based spam filtering is the way to go (some client-based filtering can also help, but shouldn't be the main thing), but there is not a clear way to do it:
One obvious solution mentioned by nostr:npub1v0lxxxxutpvrelsksy8cdhgfux9l6a42hsj2qzquu2zk7vc9qnkszrqj49 that had never occurred to me was that clients should default to fetching replies from the OPs inbox relays and let them decide if they want their reply section to be filthy and full of spam or a nice place.
Ribeyes make you strong 💪
How about a hash cash based pow concept where nostritches have to Zap the network or a specific relay or something like that to make a post. Cost to post goes up until spam decreases, almost like a difficulty adjustment. Every action (post, like, repost, etc) all has imbedded zaps. It would also be acceptable for a lower tier, less expensive experience that has more spam but costs less (nothing?). In this way end users can specify how much they want to spend and what they want their experience to be like. Could also provide incentive to run relays. Market dynamics would reward most freedom, least censorship, best / fastest relay performance.
...could a also provide financial incentive to make client applications with elegance, control, and constantly improving end user experience. We may all end up spending $12 / month but based on usage and in a free market of ideas and applications.
Couple of days ago I suggested a simple method to reduce the spammer accounts on relay side. Tgis means that all relay should get 1sat for every new user account (and/or every month to check the account is still living). This means that the account must have a connected LN address. This is not so simple task to automatize. Therefore smaller amount of spammer account have to filter or put on a blacklist on relay side.
Any opinion?
#dev #aakdev #asknostr
Do people want messages from randos? Because I mainly see posts from my follows
Bicho, o meu aqui tá lento pra caramba. Que merda!
