Implementing a monolithic kernel on top of Nostr?
This sounds like the absolute antithesis of Nostr design principles. Don't you mean a microkernel based distributed OS?
Discussion
I have no idea. I've never developed an OS before.
there's no need to, you are just creating a system-wide auth scheme based on bip-340 keys, literally just means a native signer enclave/bunker and a nostr based remote shell interface
also, yes, it would be easy to build this tooling and have a simple lock/unlock interface and permissions for event signing and everything, think like nos2x but it's SSH as well, so you can also use it to connect to your VPS or router and you could even then build further to create client services and ACL permissions systems that are generalised and cover everything, not just read/write access to relays, i mean everything, including blossom servers, CDN download, everything
it makes small scale peer to peer services spamproof and dos proof
Yeah, just do that.
I tend to use operating system in the CPE literal definition === kernel. I hate throwing around with work OS just because we have thrown together some applications on like Debian or something which is like what 90% of people do. If you aren't at least stuffing things into the device tree or adding system calls at build time, you're not modifying the OS and therefor its just another distro imo. Modules don't count :)
But I suppose this means low level protocols, however nostr isnt taking over any byte-level protocols yet and likely won't unless we start to freak out over it. We can have secp256k everywhere, but Linux already has so many decentralized protocols and already has them working well. The issues they are trying to solve are insanely complex which is why it's not mainstream yet.
GNU has made some serious progress in this space.
Yeah, I say further down that I mean something more like a distro.
linux kernel already takes too much in that could be user space, i mean, a lot of stuff has moved into FUSE now and it's just easier to build there, this is part of the intellectual appeal of the BSDs
if you ask me, the kernel should step aside from anything more complex than a TTY, when it comes to networks, it just makes it less flexible
Can't dissagree. Lightweight and easily extensible kernels are ideal IMO.