Once you sign and give that to somebody, you can never block its spread, independent of Nostr. We can make it harder, but somebody else can make it easier.
Discussion
You can always just hop in your Time Machie (aka nostr signature revocation device)
ππ
That makes sense. I am trying to think out a solution here for subscriber content, but since Nostr is all public data besides DMs, I don't think it's solvable?
Are to trying to censor content behind a paywall?
If so, you might have come to the wrong place.
A paywall is not censorship πππ
Itβs self censoring for self interest.
So people shouldn't get paid, and art/music/literature should all be free then?
Nothing wrong with paying for stuff. Or only do stuff for payment.
Asking for payment for something you made is self censorship?
It should be given to someone for nothing?
Am I missing something?
Yes, nobody said that second sentence.
You have hallucinated it.
π I did but I was just trying to take the next step.
π whoops π
I wasnβt really making a point, just being obtuse with Derek. Itβs just v. hard to do paywalls on nostr because nostr is censor resistant.
Content spreads to lots of uncontrolled placed very quickly here.
Yes, this is true. I was thinking of zap.stream in particular. Pay to unlock a stream of a creator etc. I think certain content lends itself to different monetization models.
Encryption for private content over nostr.
The main thing is to make it juat annoying enough
You can do it in a new event kind that is similar to private messages. In that way, the only way to leak the message is to leak one's main private key.
It's possible to leak it but it has a cost.
The more we talk about it, I'd rather just do value for value. It's half of the reason I fell in love with Nostr in the first place. I believe this was juste being misguided and trying to find a solution that didn't need to be solved.
We should have both implemented. Market decides.
Last message: https://github.com/nostr-protocol/nips/pull/468