adding a label to restricted posts
Discussion
What are “restricted” posts?
Ones limited to your follows
On that one relay lol
Every post on that relay will be broadcast out to other relays for all to see 😂
If the relay supports the spec I guess it won't rebroadcast those messages.
Either way any npubs being followed could just reshare the restricted message.
Yep. It’s a pointless feature. A crowd wall would be a better approach, where the author can set a threshold and then once it’s met the note is unlocked and made public for all.
in a perfect world its a post that can only exist on specific relays, but its a bit like delete/undelete so depends on relays to honor the special flag on the post.
Practical examples using this are the 2 relays nostr:npub180cvv07tjdrrgpa0j7j7tmnyl2yr6yr7l8j4s3evf6u64th6gkwsyjh6w6 just released:
A fairly pointless feature if you ask me. A crowd wall would be more useful. Set a threshold on the content, and then unlock it for all publicly once the threshold is met.
A crowd well is generally an interesting feature but I think it works well for a specific content, but it's not applicable for a continuous steam, like a feed.
Most relays already honor it, we're getting there.
Good luck with that. I don’t see a point to that.
Can you explain what you think about it?
Well just like how can you prevent someone from leaking it to another relay? Or a relay they own.
That argument applies to any paywall on the internet today, and yet they work reasonably well in most cases.
Even super encrypted private messages can be leaked and screenshots exist, that doesn't mean we should just give up and write everything in public.
Pirated music and movies can be easily found on the internet by anyone, and yet people continue to pay for these things.
In the case of Nostr, NIP-70 together with the conscience of the reader prevent the content from being easily leaked, but nothing is guaranteed, of course.
I guess that makes sense. I kinda get the use case now.
A problem with a paywalled approach is that it artificially limits your reach to only those who already know they want to pay for your content, and this disproportionally hurts smaller/independent artists/musicians/filmmakers/etc. Paywalled systems may work well for you if you are an established artist with a large fan base, or in cases like movies where most people know they want to watch it before they pay for it. Also, most music and movies are included with streaming plans. Most artists are not well known with large followings. Publishing your content freely accessible is a better approach for most artists, as long as they are intentionally publishing it into a system that allows viewers/listeners to easily return value to them, such as on nostr with zaps. There are many examples on nostr already of artists comparing how much more they’ve already made via value-4-value zaps vs. what they’ve made using other platforms. Paywalls CAN work for some, but they don’t work for most.
It's not really like a traditional paywall. Zapbox works with any previous zaps over 3 month period, so a zapbox note can be more like a reward for the people who have supported a creator through public v4v.
I definitely agree with you that it would be tough to make that the exclusive means of disseminating one's works in most cases, but if used correctly it could create inclusivity, closer connection, and more incentive to zap public content.
Loxbox, in the other hand, serves a completely different purpose. I think "restricted" is probably appropriate language for the technical explanation but something more like "limited" might be better language user-side. The example running through my mind is that the people who like my pretty pictures aren't going to care about when my grandma's funeral is taking place, but my friends & family will. I'm more likely to also be following those people, so lockbox notes limit the immediate spread to that group. It's not like it's private information but its unnecessary, maybe uncomfortable, to tell the whole world.
Sorry to interject, but I see the potential for these to gain a lot of traction. 😅
Your interjections are welcome 🙌 It’s interesting to experiment and explore potential use cases.
🫂 thanks. I think so too. The risk of leaks & broadcasts is there but its mutual trust based, which I see as a huge step forward. Up until now, the follow list has had basically 2 functions. Now it has 3.
i was about to turn mine off the other day because lots of apps are now adding protected events to things like relay group chat? I couldn't use flotilla with my relay because of this.
The beautiful solution would be to add AUTH support and then accept these events after the client automatically authenticates.
I'm not sure how you would do that, I think instead of forwarding the websocket messages to strfry you could just call "strfry import" and it would accept anything.
Also I notice a typo in the second screenshot. Should be “intended” instead of “intented”
I still don't know which relay should I send replies of this post to. Everyone that I receive it from? Zaps as well?
send to only the relay(s) it came from yep.. if its more than one relay its likely to be a leak (or could be the author did that on purpose), but thats ok it will get less leaky over time with more nip70 support rolling out.
probably the reply should also be restricted and only be sent to the same relay the restricted root post came from, or it will look weird when others can see your reply but can’t fetch the root.
But it will be messy and you don’t know if you have write access to that relay, maybe restricted posts shouldn’t have replies at all
I receive a bunch of events via proxies or push notifications. Without a clear way of knowing which relay is supposed to have this, posts will just go everywhere.
Also, search relays return protected events as well without any reference for where it came from.
More reasons to better disable replies on restricted posts? Or you think we can still make it work without it looking broken half the time?
What about reactions and zaps? Those should also only go to the right relay.
I don't know how to solve it. Protected events need better specs.
i get that it seems like a mess but.. amethyst knows where the event came from, i can see it in the expert UI. simply send it there. if it was a leak, from proxies/search/etc who cares, it tried. the more clients/relays that implement basic nip70 the less it'll leak in the future
"or it will look weird when others can see your reply but can’t fetch the root"
Could that not be a marketing opportunity for the root and zapbox? Provided a standardised placeholder makes clear that a root indeed exists and what one has to do to be able to see this root (zap this much to this person...).
I was just thinking how to highlight posts from a zapbox, this could work. Maybe I would link the badge to the https entry point of the relay, where it's supposed to explain how it works.
Better, we can use NIP-11 for that.
The link is still useful to have some personalized feedback, like zapbox 's stats.