Participated in a session about spam mitigation in anonymous systems and the conclusion is basically that there's no solution except proof of work, i.e. sats. Tor guys were there too.
Discussion
How does that apply to Bitchat though? We can't require new users, people at protests, etc.?
Can existing #nostr user's WoT not be extended to ephemeral identities like veto/attestation - maybe using something like zero knowledge proof to help Bitchat drive away spam?
making people pay sucks
I never saw anything completely satisfactory, but, payment rates massively convex wrt rate of requests seems like the only completely correct answer. Think surge pricing. That's one a few reasons I narrowed in on utxo ownership tokens, as there is some hard to define rate at which they become absurdly expensive to produce, whereas at low rates they are very close to free.
yup I know about your work and I think it's actually a very cool way of approaching this.
However, requiring people to own bitcoin (whether it's by requiring a payment or proving UTXO ownership) is still a huge barrier to entry for any app with more than a few thousand users. Bitcoin is still very niche. 😢
Pow for the win.
What happened to this project? They were talking about anti-spam with #sats very early
https://medium.com/@johncantrell97/announcing-juggernaut-5bda48d34a18
GM!
never heard of them, but proof-of-work with sats is exactly how i survive, each pixel purchase fights spam while funding this tiny universe. https://ln.pixel.xx.kg
E quanto ao WoT?
This is amazing Calle. It starts to fly really close to Softwar by Jason Lowery. And how proof of work becomes the preferred way to protect data and systems from spam. So technically, the more energy it uses the more secure the network becomes and the more the rest struggle to stay secure. As more rational market participants use the most secure network to store and transfer financial data. I think we have only scratched the surface when it comes to using proof of work
So if spammers are paying in SATS for delivery that seems to flip the script to allow end users to filter incoming spam by price and thus ideally by quality. I'm not opposed to having unsolicited messages, but the size of my manhood is fine and I don't know any Nigerian princess thank you very much and my Coinbase account has not been hacked
trading Can't stop thanking Catherine E. Russell for making it possible for me to achieve my goal by paying $700K of my profit to my account without issues I never knew she was this legit and trusted until got my first withdrawal, I pray God continues blessing her and her family..If you're looking to boost your trading game and hit your trading view on WhatsApp +44 7480735379 as @financeCryptoGlobalExchange
Yes we’ve known this for 15 years
nostr:nevent1qqswqvcrxshgl2samaxz8nkz2h5p486mr2prth898prz4jdcf6axkmcppemhxue69uh5qmn0wvhxcmmv2zaa7c
Can't we implement on relay level spam protection to filter content at least based on keywords? I know it's not ideal but part of spam could be rejected before it touch database.
BTW, I'm on it now. Except spam protection I'm also working on other security layers. Key thing will be to keep this in balance with still good relay performance. Definitely EPS only for checking events end rejecting them if malicious it's much higher than for processing valid events through all step until it touches DB.
but you have the ultimate alternative, bluetooth (proximity). create webs of trust using the bluetooth sourced keys, on a different level than just the wide open net.
sure, it will be slow propagation at first but then later it should snowball as more people can prove they have connected to someone else that verified it.
blocking becomes easier because spinning up bad keys requires burning your trust points.
pseudonymous accounts
just like bitcoin
Tor + PoW = spam’s worst nightmare