Blockstream gud cumpani - zaps everyone - zapvertising - yay
Some dude/or group - uknown company (maybe sells drugs to children) - zaps everyone - spam - boo
Which is it?
I've turned off zap notifications. My attention is worth more than getting clocked by a 1/10 of a penny, regardless of how much I like the company.
PS - I appreciate zaps from individuals who find my notes funny, helpful, thought provoking, etc. and I also love zapping the shit out of other people.
GFY zapvertising
getting clocked by 1/10 of a penny is a beautiful way to express it š«šš¤
I barely have any mind space left. Thank god for the zap notifications toggle. š«š
Difference is that blockstream doesnāt require users to spam everyoneās feeds with brand promotion. They just zapped to get the individualās attention. But didnāt bloat the public/following feed
nostr:note1ayx0uh9rd7rpwq00gat6q0aszet47f5hut6vxc4lrmmnerve3f3sa872dw
Same same but different. Either filling my feed, or my notifications.
Different strategies, but still stealing my attention without my permission.
Agreed re: your own notifications. But theyāre paying you to reach you, and you can give (or withhold) āpermissionā using mute.
In the other version, they pay you to reach others, who did not consent (and are not compensated) for their attention. Instead of paying the social media company to show ads to users, itās paying one user to show ads to other users. The unpaid viewers have the same experience (or worse).
Iām fine with someone zapping me for my own attention - thatās a market decision I am free to make - but Iām not comfortable forcing you to look at a random post just so I can get zapped.
I donāt really see the difference. The company who enlists people by giving free sats has just outsourced the labour. Theyāve convinced people to do the work for them, infiltrated the feed vs the notifs, and didnāt have to code a bot.
Oh, what I mean is that Iām okay with being paid to *view* an ad. Iām not okay with being paid to force others to view an ad.
The company doing the latter doesnāt say āzap your friends with a note about my businessā. They say āIāll zap you if you tell your friends about meā, with the result being that their ads are shown to others without those friendsā consent.
Does that make more sense?
Yeah, I see what youāre saying.
I was also referring to the zappr bot, as some people thought that was spam but block stream wasnāt š¤·āāļø
As long as I can āprotectā my attention, that is what is most important to me. Muting zap notifications is an option, but I also enjoy zap battles. Iād love to be able to mute zap notifications from outside my ānetworkā.
Iām not sure how you would combat the other, without muting people who you otherwise enjoy interacting with.
I would put zappr & blockstream in the same general category, but to me, neither is spam, because a proof of work is required before my attention can be caught.
Does muting an account also mute a zap notification from that person? If notā¦ it should!
As for the āzap you if you spam your friendsā model, that was what clicked for me today. If I promote a business in exchange for sats, then Iām gonna get myself muted by people who I respect and want to engage with. Not worth it at all, never mind the disingenuous promotion of a brand I donāt personally believe in.
I think this heavily undermines the concept that zaps are signal.
Iām not ok with viewing ads, paid or unpaid. I run my own relay, pay for several more, and donate to Damus development. The day I canāt easy mute ads is the day I go back to being without social media.
I suppose notification settings are going to need to be granular on zaps soon. Notify for zaps from: { followed, all, none }
We are in the same boat kitty Kat.
This is an abuse vector Iāve been expecting, but I think it can be easily solved.
#[4]ā was an example I found pleasing because it advertised nothing except spreading love and sats around, but functionally itās just so easy.
If you told me I could advertise to 1000ās of people with a fairly predictable demographic at this point for a couple bucks, Iād jump on it too. Compared to even Facebook ads itās a steal depending on the market youāre in.
Ads are death in social media. The absolute worst mistake we could make on this protocol is to make it an attractive target for advertising of any sort. Once that money rolls in, everything changes.
I agree with most of this, but I think the influx of advertising dollars is inevitable. What the user needs is control and choice over what - if anything - we see. Just like global feed relay configuration š
I agree with most of you guys. The "ad for zap" model is bound to happen. It's just another iteration of "influencer" culture with product placements. You pay me money and I will blast or shill your product to my followers. So the problem is long standing and big problem.
I can see nostr:npub12rze589jx0gg6kslkjfl2gxxkhtlw73t5shyve5qrglrv6c2qflqejj7ns point and I believe it's fair as getting traction as a small business is hard. So why should their be a double standard?
I think reading over this thread it's not so much this question, but how advertising is conducted. I agree with both nostr:npub14qz92uedt0a8jte8jqg63jr3s5cc99cej36jh883z6tprlu354uqqe2q26 and nostr:npub1wtuh24gpuxjyvnmjwlvxzg8k0elhasagfmmgz0x8vp4ltcy8ples54e7js that blatant shilling isn't cool and is a reason why legacy social media is insufferable.
So where do we find a balance?
If I put on my entrepreneur/sales hat I think as a group we must reexamine the approach of making a sale and how we sell products. Applying the traditional sales tactics on savvy consumers like that who inhabit #nostr is going to lead to ruin as a business owner and blow up any sort of goodwill they may have had for us.
I have long been a advocate of "building in public" and the "Orbit Model" of marketing and to me this is one of the paths forward aside from nostr:npub1jg552aulj07skd6e7y2hu0vl5g8nl5jvfw8jhn6jpjk0vjd0waksvl6n8n approach with zapvertising. If I was to build a product/service I want my clients to see my journey when I'm building up my business. I want my product/service to become a story that I have shared with the users that have followed along. My failures, my success, I want the community to see that. When it launches I want to share in the milestone with the community I have built. Doing it this way, to me it's no longer an ad, but I did/doing something cool and it's up to you if your buy something from me or not when that milestone is reached.
So I think their is a right and wrong way to advertise on here and I think those who do it right will be rewarded and the ones that don't will be muted by the very client/community base they are trying to build through consensus. That is the nature of this protocol.
Excellent points:
āā¦have long been a advocate of "building in public" and the "Orbit Model" of marketing and to me this is one of the paths forward aside from @Blockstream approach with zapvertising. If I was to build a product/service I want my clients to see my journey when I'm building up my business. I want my product/service to become a story that I have shared with the users that have followed along. My failures, my success, I want the community to see that. When it launches I want to share in the milestone with the community I have built. Doing it this way, to me it's no longer an ad, but I did/doing something cool and it's up to you if your buy something from me or not when that milestone is reached.ā
What you have written here is exactly why nostr and its clients resonate so much with me. I have been here for many iterations. For the successes and the failures. I am invested in the success and am willing to contribute to grow it and protect it. The best thing is that it feels like we get immediate feedback from the devs. They throw it out here for us to play with, we give feedback, and then they adapt. It builds a social fabric that is resistant and builds loyalty to clients and the protocol.
Grass roots, transparent, shared goals and contributions from a multitude of devs with different ideas. We get to hitch a ride and feel like we are in it to win it.
šÆš¤
Totally get where you (both) are coming from here
To me, this is another instance where nostr clients should offer the optionality and control over your own experience.
Any user is free to part with their own sats as desired. It should also be each userās choice whether or not to know about it, or to read an attached zap note, etc.
My main point is that zapping one user to incentivize him to spam all of his followers, with no zap compensation or consent from those followers, is a different game, and itās one that Iām uncomfortable participating in. Zap me to show me a note ā okay, thatās my choice to accept ā but pay me to spam my followers without their consentā¦. No thanks uncle
I can šÆ stand next to you on that sentiment. If people want to do this, they can, but I absolutely should be able to filter it - and do so easily.
Iām sure controls will come out of it as things grow.
Yes. I made the same point about zappr and blockstream. They are not any different, if they are spam then they are both spam. If they are a zapvetisent then they both are.
Spam for a friend model is clever because it beats the filters and hits the feed, but comes at a huge cost to the āfriendsā. If it happens again, Iām sure many people will be muted and unfollowed.
#[2]ā #[3]ā
Do yāall kno who blockstream is? Connection to Damus dev. Blockstream is Willās #[4]ā former employer
(forbes)
Fr? Never knew Will worked for blockstream. Thatās cool - theyāre a solid company and respectable brand
Does it matter, free open communication protocol with free open money, zap however and whoever you want š¤·āāļø
I agree, and thatās why muting people and turning off zap notifications are key.
Even more granular would be better. Iād like to turn off zap notifications for any zap outside of my ānetworkā therefore corps. would not be able to infiltrate my notifs and I could still engage in zap battles š¤·āāļø
I have questions here.
Per culturally accessible standards.
āGift givingā puts demand on the other person to either gift-give back, or offer up a comparable deed.
Thatās why I believe this app has gambling issues associated with it. Your introducing users to gambling. Which opens up whole other component of addiction.
I would argue gift giving is the exact opposite - a gift means you are being given something with no expectation of returning equal value. That is why itās a gift and not a transaction.
No. Read up on sociology
Many would argue that is a āproperā gift giving spirit (me included) but it doesnāt seem to be universal anymore.
Iām referring to sociology gift giving. Lemme find a link so look more legit here
Zapping is gift-giving. ā”ļø ā”ļø ā”ļø
Gifts are never free š
Always expectation that a gift will be returned (same form, or different form, but value must be considered equal)
*************From Website**************
The study of gift-giving and its ties to culture were first investigated academically by Marcel Mauss, a French anthropologist and sociologist. "[Mauss's] main conclusion was that gift-giving is not uninterested ā that is, people donāt just give gifts freely and without expectation," said Kray. "In fact, gift-giving usually implies an expectation that something would be given in return at some point, whether that be something material or that be a social relationship that is built through that gift or maintained through that gift.ā
Kray and Laver discovered that their own respective findings were consistent with Maussās observations. Laver, who spent many years researching abroad in Asia, found Maussās comments on reciprocation especially applicable to Japanese gift-giving culture. āIf I am in pre-modern Japan, and I gave you a gift, you were now obligated to me,ā he said. āBy giving a gift to you, Iām binding you to me in a web of social reciprocity.ā
ā[The Yucatec Maya] have a saying that āIf someone visits your house, you should always give something, even if itās just a little water.ā Youāre always giving something to your visitor as a sign of hospitality,ā Kray said. āAnd thereās an expectation when you visit them, they will return it to you.ā
Laver pointed out how the reciprocal system of gift-giving is also present in Western culture. āEven a gift from Santa Claus is tied to good behavior ā naughty or nice, itās the reciprocal response. Gifts are never just gifts,ā he said.
https://reporter.rit.edu/features/history-and-complexities-gift-giving (https://reporter.rit.edu/features/history-and-complexities-gift-giving)
The Catholic in me has some theological observations to make from this but Iāll behave. š¤£
Letās goš Iām up for discussion?! š As long as ya donāt mind possible long replies in between as juggle few things
My primary observation is that this relates to Jesusā command to love your enemy, and the parables of the Good Samaritan, and the Cheerful Giver.
All these are examples of giving where there was absolutely no expectation (or even possibility of) mutual return.
Perhaps that was Jesus point, to purify the act of giving by practicing itās quietly and to those from whom you believe there will be no possible return.
I think this is why zapping anonymously is so powerful.
Your not anonymous tho. Cause your wine filter relay tells other who ya zappin & amounts
Really? I didnāt know that? Would normal people have the skills to figure that out?
Yes. #[5]ā taught me
He was using his own node though?
Yes, you need your own zapper. š¶š¾š«”
Right. My understanding was you needed your own node?
Not node specifically, but the thing that serves lnurlp and the one that gets the callback when payment is processed. You basically get the list of relays that user has configured and potentially can tell who it is, using the sometimes unique signature of the relays (npub, Private relay with unique addresses, combination of relays, etc) š¶š¾š«”
So you can match a list of relays someone has, but that still doesnāt āproveā it was them?
With filter.nostr.wine it was easy. Npub is in relay url.š¶š¾š«”
This is a great point to discuss threat profiles, faux privacy, and verifiable anonymity.
If the point of a private zap is to give a gift anon, there is little reason to dig to figure it out except morbid curiosity.
If you are donating to a cause thatās illegal in your country, etcā¦ thatās a whole different kettle of fish then aināt it?
Exactly! My point was that you could profile people based on this things. Faux anonymity is no good, especially if users believe they are. š¶š¾š«”
It is difficult to find the correct terminology for these things. How do we describe shades of anonymity?
Pseudo anonymity! š¶š¾š«”
No matter how I spin it, LN is also traceable if needed, so is bitcoin transaction.
At the end of the day, all of it is pseudo anonymous.
Itās all one exploit, cracked code, or zero day away from being plain to read.
Precisely! š¶š¾š«”
Deferring to your expertise Fish, does the NIP-46 auth affect the npub visibility with filter?
It removes it and secure, so we are good. I am more worried about relay list being sent with nip-57 spec. Maybe it shouldnāt do that for anon zaps. Many users have unique relay configuration, plus add the amount signature and timing, and you have much smaller list of people to ID. Add pfp download and nip-05 and even narrower profile surface. Anonymity is hard problem and many holes that can be used to narrow down people. š¶š¾š«”
You really are the best #[5]ā you know that right?
Both of you are the best. Thanks for the education!
š¶š¾šš¤£ just have experience in the field of security, thatās all! By far not the best! š¶š¾š«š¤£š
Your sharing of knowledge helps us setup security for ourselves, or at minimum think of better ways to protect ourselves online. I always pay attention to what ya write, cause I kno itāll better my skills. Except that one time where I reeeeellllliiiiii missed the memo š¤£š¤£š¤£š¤£
Main takeaway should be that you are not fully anonymous whenever you are online. The longer you hold one identity the easier it is to find who you really are. Act accordingly, and use other identities and sources to stay anon when you need to. The more you use the same things, e.g., IP, nickname, wallet, phone, providers of services, the easier it is to narrow down on you. Even your notes patterns and words you use, especially in the age of AI. We might not notice it, but patterns are there. š¶š¾š«”
Totally. So many many many things factor in
#[3]ā , lot of what #[5]ā #[4]ā discussing is dev stuff. Not regular ppl speak. But main take away point is that zaps are likely almost never anonymousā¦ even when ya toggle it to anon. Even if I donāt kno how to figure it out, I can easily ask someone else that knows how
Want be anon, canāt use filters, must be on vpn, and bunch other things. Still metadata attached
Is t everyone on vpn š
š¤£š¤£ sadly nooo
I donāt run one 90% of the time. I move around a lot, and there is very little you can get from my IP address that you couldnāt guess from other things.
GeoIP is far from precise and often flatly wrong.
GeoIP?
Go to whatismyip.com and see what city it thinks youāre in (without vpn)
Mine is not correct. GeoIP is a database that attempts to place IP addresses at a location on the map.
Mine was correct šš¤·āāļø.
Depending on where you live it can be. But it is far from reliable.
Threat profiles means understanding whoās after you. Are you controversial? Stirring up techno savvy groups? Violating the law?
If the answer is no, then nobody is going to dig hard enough to do more than narrow you down to say, +/- 100 miles.
90%+ of anonymity online against anyone other than the state is controlling your mouth. Almost everyone ends up giving themselves away. Use a burner email and donāt tell anyone unique things about yourself. Enough of these, and you can be identified.
In the US, 87% of people are identifiable with only zip code, gender and date of birth.
š¤ beep boop
Even style of writing is give away. Itās nearly impossible to be anon
Reference for claim: https://dataprivacylab.org/projects/identifiability/paper1.pdf
34 pages. Coles notes pls lol
Most important takeaway:
āIt was found that 87% (216 million of 248 million) of the
population in the United States had reported characteristics that likely made them unique based
only on {5-digit ZIP, gender, date of birth}. About half of the U.S. population (132 million of 248
million or 53%) are likely to be uniquely identified by only {place, gender, date of birth}, where
place is basically the city, town, or municipality in which the person resides. And even at the
county level, {county, gender, date of birth} are likely to uniquely identify 18% of the U.S.
population. In general, few characteristics are needed to uniquely identify a person.ā
The rest is backing up the claim.
Kool. Thx.
Normal ppl also have smart computer friends. So if they donāt kno, they ask oneās that do.
Ok this be hard one to debate. š¤ Cause ya religion brings diff thoughts. Lemme get back to this
Very informative. Have a free zap! ā”ļøš
Iād say, by that definition, the lines are being blurred between gifting and favor
But the feeling of feeling indebted to the person that zaps you still exists
Pls explain further
Well a favor implies tit for tat, that you can ask a favor and by surrounding circumstances youāll return the favor in kind. An example would be like at work between coworkers.
A gift, traditionally, is extended with no strings or caveats. Think a homeless beggar ( which Iāve experienced both sides of that scenario.
Favors could be said to be an exchange across time.
Gifts though culturally augmented to be included under the exchange umbrella are foundation-ally one sided
I suppose Iām extrapolating in terms of semantics where ideally two words shouldnāt mean exactly the same thing. But with your note ab reciprocal gifting applied to my homeless example I guess the homeless person is āgivingā the implied reprieve of suffering via the change or money given
Thank you for reply. Consciously tho, donāt you feel indebted to that person? Will you not reciprocate with a gift? Gift doesnāt have be physical thing.. could be introduction to another, a favour down the road, etc
#[5]ā forgot tag ya
