Yeah and every new cool "L2 project" on Bitcoin is basically just this these days.

We must focus on the number of mints. That's more important.

splitting responsibility is also adding attack surface to my storage; relays are intended to be changed, to fail, be censored and censor. In this cases you can switch relays. They need to be treath in an adversarial way in a lot of ways.

So I think at the total opposito of your statement 😅💜

What if we specify as an open standard (in protocol) a client proxy service, such that nothing about it ever ties a client to a particular one. All they do is offload the fetching work. If you suspect they aren't serving you correctly you point your client to a different one. As long as there is no friction involved in switching away from a proxy that is censoring, I don't think there would be a drive for them to aggregate into a single service. You wouldn't be switching apps, you'd be pointing your app elsewhere.

this is what happens in the future if the "outbox-is-broken-let's-use-smart-proxy-relays" people win:

- people start relying on "caching services" to fetch their notes. now every client must run their own caching service to remain competitive.

- as the network grows, syncing from all relays becomes more and more prohibitively and databases grow to the infinite.

- less and less caching services exist, but a "local best scenario" would be if we had like 4 different clients/caching-services to read from, but then if one of them banned alex jones that would mean 25% of users lose access to alex jones. there is nothing alex jones can do to change that.

- users could switch from app A to app B that hasn't banned alex jones, but app B had already banned donald trump, so that move is questionable and uncertain. anyway, it's too much friction for a user who doesn't know how to find this caching-service setting buried deep in their settings (because UX specialists said that's the best place to put it).

- eventually it makes no sense to switch anymore and as one of the caching services gains more market share they merge with the others, saving costs and regulatory burden (these caching servers are so big they need to do spam moderation, find and delete pornography and scam bots, comply with government takedowns, defend themselves against lawsuits, it's a huge cost), so it's much better to just have a single caching-service.

- everybody still publishes to their own relay, so nostr becomes exactly like bluesky and the central service can censor anyone. eventually people give up the stupidity of using intermediary relays and just publish directly to that central service.

- that central service now can serve you ads and blue checks, shadowban everybody who doesn't pay, modify your feed with amazing AI techniques to keep you engaged and prevent you from seeing anything they don't want you to see but keep you nourished with memes.

If only that were the situation. The actual situation is that Israel deceives people about what the situation actually is. Take a closer look. They bombed the mosques and hospitals, and offered only clearly-bullshit evidence of hamas operations hiding underneath. They are starving them all to death, not just Hamas. Settlers are blocking the roads so aid cannot come in. Hamas was funded by Israel in order to have an excuse to use a "military solution". In the West Bank they continue to take homes, kill kids, steal their land and settle on it, and because Palestinians aren't citizens of Israel they have no state government protecting their rights. They have no rights. They are treated like animals with Israeli courts putting on sham shows of 'balance' which are anything but.

So no, "we all want the peace" is bullshit. Israel never wanted peace. Israel wanted safety through war. And they wanted safety from imagined threats, blown all out of proporation, probably because of being shell-shocked by the Nazis. They also wanted all of the land for themselves, and are psychopathic enough to kill the people who were living there to get it, using any kind of lies and twisted arguments to make it seem like they are doing something else.

Hamas contains some very bad people, yes, but that is because every sufficiently large group of humans contains some very bad people. I can point to IDF soldiers pissing on dead Palestinians, but unless it is representative I don't bring such data into arguments. Palestinians know what is going on, and they support Hamas because fighting back is better than dying without even trying. Hamas is a freedom fighting organisation, designated as terrorists only in the West where Zionists have outsized amounts of pull.

Israel uses the fact that Palestinians are fighting back to claim Israel's existance is threatened. But look. Gaza has had almost all it's buildings flattened, has no economic activity anymore, the people are skin and bones, bombs falling constantly. Who exactly is having their existence threatened? If you think Israel is the party whose existence is threatened, all I can say is that you have some wires crossed in that head of yours.

The more Israel pushes in this direction, the more the world turns against Israel. The Houthis are now fighting Israel. Hezbollah is active again fighting Israel. Nations around the world are making pleas with the U.N. The ICC case by South Africa. Young people everywhere on TikTok hugely in support of Palestine and having utter disgust for Israel at this point (so Zionists got TikTok banned!). Does this make Israel safer? No, it is now MUCH more liikely that Israel will be ended, not by Hamas but by the 8 billion other people on Earth who watch how Israel behaves.

So I've heard that ed25519 is a faster curve than secp256k1 and I've always believed it.

I just compared the signature verification performance of rust secp256k1 (which uses Pieter Ruille's secp256k1 c library) against the signature verification performance of rust ed25519-dalek (pure rust). They are similar. Over one million sequential signature verifications, I get these results:

Time per secp256k1 verification: 26826ns

Time per ed25519 verification: 24634ns

There are a few things about ed25519 to pay attention to though:

1) It uses SHA-512, not SHA-256 because RFC 8032 for ed25519 specifies only SHA-512. This might be why it wasn't much faster.

2) All random bitstrings make valid keys

3) The code is safe against power analysis and timing attacks (might also be true of secp256k1)

4) The dalek library does secure-erase of memory as it drops (might also be true of secp256k1)

What did you post?

that's my point

it doesn't replace outbox, it can improve it, but it addresses a different problem

how would that make a difference? pkarr could provide relay<>pubkey mapping, but you still need to fetch events from those relays 🤷‍♂️