I am very curious to understand your concerns here, but I can't say that I clearly understand the problem you would like to solve. apologies if you've mentioned it elsewhere, but would you mind stating what the goal is?
I'll add that my personal goal is to enable digital sovereignty. that is, the ability to communicate with people whom I choose to communicate with, under my own terms, and I believe nostr accomplishes this beautifully by implicitly using localism.
My goal is to increase privacy, reduce surveillance and protect users. Ideally, only my followers would have the power to combine my pubkeys and see my history. No one else should be able to link a nostr event to one of my IDs. Ideally, I want that to be the default in a protocol.
you probably want a different protocol
it sounds like you want fully private communications between a group of people, like a signal group?
Not necessarily. The content could still be readable. It just wouldn’t be interconnected.
How would someone become a follower ?
There are many possible designs, but I all of them, they would follow you ID (imagine a nip05 with multi key support), not the keys. Nip05 could change the key set based on the caller and could even encrypt to the followers PM. The important part is that the protocol is the same.People can build any ID security they wish to use in nostr.
Do you envisage a way to control who can follow you? Coz it seems that’s what would be needed for the privacy enhancement you’re talking about.
Yep, that requires a second follower specification that essentially uses one -way encrypted messages in a twitter interface to each of the followers. We just need to standardize the follower negotiation between parties (similar to creating a multi sig). The whole thing can happen in regular nostr messages. Clients just need to know how to find the new pubkeys per msg. People wouldn’t even know who is following who.
