nostr:npub1zuuajd7u3sx8xu92yav9jwxpr839cs0kc3q6t56vd5u9q033xmhsk6c2uc, nostr:npub1g53mukxnjkcmr94fhryzkqutdz2ukq4ks0gvy5af25rgmwsl4ngq43drvk, et al:
Is anyone working on iOS Blue-style indicators, so that I know how best to reach someone via DM, and what to expect in terms of send success, etc?
Not that I know of but that would be cool. MLS is easy to sniff out based on the existence of key package events for a user.
I'd humbly suggest that it's crucial, not just cool. If we're going to take share from Signal, Matrix, etc., we need baseline UX like this.
I tend to agree. Unfortunately it'll be up to clients to implement this well.
I would love to see NIP-04 go away completely and NIP-17 only be used in very low risk environments.
Once we get broad traction with MLS-based clients it'll be trivial to show whether a user can be contacted that way or if you need to fall back to NIP-17 (or double ratchet). There really isn't ANY reason to use NIP-04 at this point.
Have you thought about NIP 46 Nostr Remote Signing? It uses NIP 44 for encrypting messages between client (programs) and signers (programs).
And, by my simplistic understanding, that is just NIP 4 with a different encryption algo, but otherwise equivalent ECDH and similar metadata profiles.
As far as I’m aware this is unsolved.
Ideally all this comms happens under the hood, so that the end user does not have to think about DM standards
No question. This is crucial, hence my question. As it stands, there's no way to know what I'm using and if I should expect it to just work.
I understand and value the experimentation by devs.
I wonder if there is some low effort way to signal what DM standard my intended counterparty prefers.
cc nostr:npub1gcxzte5zlkncx26j68ez60fzkvtkm9e0vrwdcvsjakxf9mu9qewqlfnj5z nostr:npub180cvv07tjdrrgpa0j7j7tmnyl2yr6yr7l8j4s3evf6u64th6gkwsyjh6w6
Yes, clients can look for recent events kinds of each protocol.
But the issue is that all clients must implement all protocols, which is never going to be the case.
No they don't. Clients should remove NIP-04 right now.
We should just kill NIP-04 as best we can. e.g. clients should just stop supporting it.
We should only really be using NIP-17 when it's low risk.
It's easy to check for user readiness to use MLS (and I think double ratchet too?).
it's pretty bad out there right now. send someone NIP-104, NIP-114, NIP-17, or NIP-04. i've sent people DMs on NIP-17 and gotten zero response and then send it again on NIP-04 and get one right away. i can't imagine adding two more to this process.
I couldn’t get halfway through your reply without drifting off. You’re the messenger, and I’m grateful, but objectively, this is madness.
I agree, this is madness. DMing on Nostr hasn't gotten better, it's just gotten more complicated.
I’ve avoided NIP-04 once I was aware it wasn’t as good. It comes at a cost though. People aren’t on 0xChat etc and I haven’t done much outside of Damus yet.
It's unavoidable if people can DM you via NIP-04 clients though. Clients need to step up, IMO.
