Perhaps I'm being a bit biased here too but Stella seems to be right. What TheSameCat here is describing a form of centralization. Isn't this what we're trying to avoid?

Reply to this note

Please Login to reply.

Discussion

I did not describe a form of centralization at all. At least I didn’t mean to. Outbox model is geared towards making it more possible to run your own relay or be a part of a smaller relay and still be seen. That’s the entire point, is to promote the viability of smaller relays.

As it stands now, it is still more decentralized than almost any other service. You would have to take sweeping action against multiple independent operators in multiple jurisdictions to substantially break Nostr. Banning someone in a meaningful way would require collusion from multiple people on multiple continents.

P2P communication has never been shown to work in a meaningful way for dynamic content- but there is a happy medium.

I tend to look disfavorably at the word “decentralized” anyways. The term lacks specificity. A better term is “distributed” which lies on a continuum. Nostr is *more* distributed than most social platforms, which lends it the censorship resistant properties it has. It is not totally distributed, nor should it be, in my opinion. Totally distributed systems tend to break down due to a large number of factors, such as nodes not being persistently online, discoverable, etc.

I am very curious what observations have led you to believe that relays are being more and more hidden. Managing relays is central to the nostr experience imo.