> by means of allowing advanced relay choice for each kind of action and circumstance
“Advanced relay choice” is challenging to be in the domain of the majority of nostr enjoyers.
I don't know if nostr:nprofile1qyvhwumn8ghj7urjv4kkjatd9ec8y6tdv9kzumn9wshsz9thwden5te0dehhxarj9ehhsarj9ejx2a30qyd8wumn8ghj7ur4wfshv6tyvyhxummnw3ezumrpdejz7qgjwaehxw309ajhjetn9enrw73wd9hj7qgewaehxw309akkzarjd9uzuer9wfnkjemf9e3k7mf0qqsxu35yyt0mwjjh8pcz4zprhxegz69t4wr9t74vk6zne58wzh0waychnn7yc was joking but clients should actually offer protection against that kind of stuff -- perhaps not explicitly, but by means of allowing advanced relay choice for each kind of action and circumstance.
Discussion
You have no idea if that is true.
This is the feedback from folks here. Let’s admit this as a starting point, so that we may find a solution that works.
nostr:nevent1qqsty9kcprhw4t90p2dwvwh760vmhlcq4ajxcpw6r0vv6yk3gw6mjmsaacru8
"Even as a technical horse rider I find the car to be very hard to ride and a hassle."
None of the current clients has done relays right, and Nostr isn't valuable enough for anyone to be worth spamming or learning to defend against spam at this point.
If you want Nostr to work you have to stop denying that it is different from other things and trying to accommodate to the old paradigm. You can't change the world if you can't even get up from your couch to get the TV remote.
Users sign up for email hosting. They generally know if they are using gmail or fastmail or proton mail. And they generally pay for it. In a healthy nostr ecosystem it would be the same. Users would know which relay service(s) they signed up for. So the question then is: how much do they know about other relays?
If someone says "come join my chatroom on relay X" then they will know about relay X. It wasn't so hard.
If their client says "this nasty message came from relay Y, would you like to block relay Y?" then they can decide. It wasn't so hard.
Of course few people are going to study all the relays and make judgements about them all outside of specific reasons to.
I'm of the opinion that for outbox model, and for some applications on top of it, users don't need to be concerned about which relays are involved. I like hiding that detail. The relays can just magically work. But when you care about censorship or moderation or bad behavior, generally at that point you'll want to find out if you should cut off an account or perhaps an entire relay. The context (kind-1/1111? relay chat? global?) matters a lot.
Thanks, this is helpful.
To be clear in the email example protonmail, gmail are “apps” in the eyes of the email customers.
Relay would be something like set up your POP3, or SMTP servers. These technicalities are what gmail handles on your behalf, so gmail is running the outbox equivalent for its customers.
I love the idea upon outbox things can just be found and just work (has any dev measured this statement yet?). Agree directionally this is correct.
Individual censorship decisions for an entire relay is a good point for having to think about a relay - maybe this a future solution to a future problem? Is it a today problem?
Everybody knows Gmail isn't just an "app" otherwise they wouldn't presume to be able to talk to people that have non-Gmail addresses from their Gmail app.
People are only as dumb as the product UX insists that they be.
A better example would be discord where you part of starcraft server, banned from blueskye server, part of foss App XYZ server etc
isnt discord just an app
Yes.
Probably a confused point from me.
The whole design premise is that discord is centered on server (analgous to relay lists today on mostr apps nostr) selection.
Yahoo mail is an app that sends and receives on the email protocol, where yahoo users dont have to think about the existence of their or their counterparties email servers. This is analogous to the outbox it just works model.
prompting to block an entire relay of 1000s users is pretty bad just when 1 user is noisy and annoying. this is what happened on activitypub and turned into a complete disaster of censorship and isolated relays.
That's not the same kind of block.
i reread the post and don't see how it's different, other than it wouldn't be as effective
1. this wouldn't block following people from that relay or browsing their notes or profiles specifically, this would only block it from "global" feeds (like replies feed for such and such).
2. this is one user blocking stuff for himself, not a server admin blocking on behalf of others.
3. in practice reading "global" (i.e. any filter without an "authors" or "ids") would have to be done from a limited set of relays anyway, which means all others are "blocked" by default -- this would be just moving this specific relay out of the whitelist.
In any case I'm not saying this is what the UX should be for Nostr, far from that, this was just an illustrative example idea (I'm taking nostr:npub1acg6thl5psv62405rljzkj8spesceyfz2c32udakc2ak0dmvfeyse9p35c's words here as mine, but I also think he agrees).
You are right.
nostr:npub176p7sup477k5738qhxx0hk2n0cty2k5je5uvalzvkvwmw4tltmeqw7vgup nostr:npub1wf4pufsucer5va8g9p0rj5dnhvfeh6d8w0g6eayaep5dhps6rsgs43dgh9 do we have a concept or implementation of a WOT score for relays (not npubs)?
Don't think so as there's no event to follow or be member of a relay, with the exception of communities. That would be an interesting signal
You are right.