Well, if someone wants that propagation, they can use a broadcaster. I do that, sometimes, so that people can find my npub.

Reply to this note

Please Login to reply.

Discussion

In the interest of censorship resistance, this should be the default (and opt-out) behaviour. One shouldn't have to get through all sorts of hoops to get heard.

I think some of the clients are doing that, by having a standard relay set, but they don't let you opt-out. Probably hard-coded in.

No, I mean across all of them. Every relay should be like Blastr.

Oh, you mean the relays should be configurable? Yeah, I agree, but that's what the arguing has been about, lately, as the clients seem to be dragging their feet on allowing that.

That would be the "broadcast" parameter, here:

wss://filter.nostr.wine/npub1m4ny6hjqzepn4rxknuq94c2gpqzr29ufkkw7ttcxyak7v43n6vvsajc2jl?broadcast=true&global=all

Yes, and I think this broadcast=true&global=all should be set by default unless explicitly requested by the client to keep the note on this relay only.

Have to properly implement NIP-11 and NIP-42 and that doesn't seem persistent across clients.

I think you got it a bit wrong. My proposal is that relays propagate notes automatically, unless the client tels them not to.

This doesnt really scale all that well because every relay would be sent every event. Should they store and relay them all? Relays shouldn't be expected to store the entire state of the network.

I like the custom-broadcasting model, where you can set your broadcasting target-relays in the relay. Then you create little clusters of relays, that talk to each other, and everyone just needs one and a backup.

I kinda feel like this is being pushed too much on the user, through the client relay settings, but it's too advanced for them. They should just say, "these two relays and broadcasting from the first one", with broadcasting=TRUE as the default.

Maybe clients can suggest relays based on follow clusters? Perhaps they will lead to centralisation.

We aren't surprised that most blockchain nodes do the same, are we?

Except Mina, but even it supports so-called "archive nodes".

Yes, they should.

A block chain node needs the entire state to be useful. Nostr clients just need 99% of the very small part of the network the user is interested in.

That’s the whole point of the outbox model; you don’t jump through hoops nor send your note to hundreds of relays.

You signal where people interest in your stuff should find you and they fetch the data from there

I wish I could tell if it worked, tho.

I feel like most people can't see what I write, even if they follow me, and I've kinda gotten used to it.

The weirdest moment, was a picture of my haircut going 🚀 on the big relays and everyone like,

Who dis?

Well, that was the weirdest moment... so far.