So is your scaling solution to have larger centralized servers?
Discussion
It is to have a credible exit for anyone that wants to use them.
This is a core aspect Pubky has that Nostr does not.
PKDNS
Careful your participation on this protocol might accidentally make it succeed. Tread lightly.
That makes sense. But what’s the point of building a decentralized protocol if it ultimately ends up in the hands of a centralized set of servers? Id rather bank on devs figuring something out to keep it fully decentralized than submit to centralization.
Decentralization is a network quality.
It is achieved mostly by reducing the amount of data in the system, while increasing the quantity of unique copies of that data.
If your protocol is "poorly" designed, it will revert to centralization at scale.
Merely being an open protocol is not enough.
So you must intentionally include in your design, how to handle centralization.
Is nostr not being improved to combat that with implemented economic incentives and general protocol improvements that would enhance data replication? Also think I might have worded my previous response wrong. I meant is the solution you are building focused on scaling using centralized servers? I’m new to this trying to get a grasp.
Pubky allows for both self-hosting and centralized hosting in a safe way.
Hosts are commoditized and thus compete on how little they censor.
Users can simply change a setting if their host misbehaves, to switch to another host, or to self hosting.