Those who view the time on their phones, by the way, represent a pre-wristwatch era of pocket watches, only now they are much bulkier, less reliable and allow their manufacturers, governments and various third parties to track their owners.
#m=image%2Fjpeg&dim=1440x1440&blurhash=U%25IX%24%7Dofxut6IuWBofj%5B%7EpWBWBayogWBf6j%5B&x=d50519685aa10c12dd937a64f55c3cbe1c7898976c7d55d1f878ea233a41afa1In the beginning of April, I got myself a full-steel version of Lamy 2000 EF. Same feeling, considering it has a white gold nib.
Which repo? The one on GitHub? I ceased any activity there a long time ago.
Why are nips on a repo hosted by one of the most censorship-loving companies in the world? And not e.g. on a wiki hosted independently.
I can formalize my proposals into a document when I have time and put it up somewhere if anyone is interested though.
> Run it e.g. on the Tor layer and you won't have to deal with DNS, DMARC etc.
Right, but this limits access for the average user, HTTP connections are far less censored than SMTP traffic in reality at this point in time.
> and it's not the protocol's fault it has been heavily misused by big players on the clearnet.
Solid point. I failed to accept SMTP as a bare protocol and reusing it for client-server, but if we looked at it that way, lets just skip to HTTPS.
> it's plaintext, human-readable (except MIME extensions for attachments) and can be debugged without all those fancy tools
Which is what nostr:npub1wqfzz2p880wq0tumuae9lfwyhs8uz35xd0kr34zrvrwyh3kvrzuskcqsyn has been brainstorming. Get the benefits of HTTP upgrades and decades of heavy development for client-server, server-server and so on.
I'm not married to websockets, but I do think nostr fails in client performance, notifications and so on, without persistent connections, but we need clients of all types to be able to communicate directly on the network, not their own servers, over some other messy protocol.
>Nostr tries to reinvent the same functionality
This is true all over the nostr protocol. However keep in mind, a lot, if not most of us, dislike/distrust "mainstream" big-tech/government funded protocols. I'm not saying its right, or efficient, but then what is Bitcoin?
I still doubt you fully got the point, but OK. Let's consider HTTP as a baseline, I have three questions then:
1) Why JSON? HTTP itself offers a wonderful way to transfer metadata, it's called headers. They require much less CPU cycles to parse and shape. They are naturally separated from the request/response body. All specific headers can start with X-Nostr- to not interfere with anything current. Even the digital signature can be put there if it's short enough.
2) Why TLS? Aren't signatures themselves enough to prevent tampering with? Isn't current centralized PKI prone to censorship as well? On top of that, TLS over e.g. Tor isn't necessary at all.
3) Why a single (and not very popular) signature algorithm instead of the wide choice offered by OpenPGP, where we can reuse existing libraries/tools (that have been working all this time even on DOS) for both signing and, if necessary, asymmetrical note encryption (to mitigate number 2 completely)?
P.S. "Just because you're unique, doesn't mean you're useful" Being different from mainstream is not enough to automagically guarantee yo're doing things right.
"Junk on top of junk" is exactly what JSON on top of WebSockets on top of HTTPS is. At least in terms of wasted CPU cycles and energy watts.
SMTP is just as censored as the underlying infrastructure. Run it e.g. on the Tor layer and you won't have to deal with DNS, DMARC etc. I only gave it as an example of an already established transport that everyone can build upon (and it's not the protocol's fault it has been heavily misused by big players on the clearnet). And more importantly, it's plaintext, human-readable (except MIME extensions for attachments) and can be debugged without all those fancy tools. And this example was given because, from what can be seen from outside, Nostr tries to reinvent the same functionality + mailing list servers' one. Just wrapping everything into more opaque binary layers than it should.
Or rather of the Dunning-Kruger effect.
Have you been paying attention to what nostr:npub1qdjn8j4gwgmkj3k5un775nq6q3q7mguv5tvajstmkdsqdja2havq03fqm7 and nostr:npub1wqfzz2p880wq0tumuae9lfwyhs8uz35xd0kr34zrvrwyh3kvrzuskcqsyn are doing with our SDK?
It's been interesting, as they're removing complexity and streamlining the basic processes, so that there's a stripped-down version on offer, that transmits the same data.
The same data, over the same websockets, wrapped into the same json, signed with the same irreplaceable algo (as opposed to what's offered by OpenPGP)?
It's cool that there is an SDK to take care of all the low-level stuff. But it still won't run where S/MIME-enabled mailing lists would. Because the protocol itself still is too fucking bloated at the core level.
Just insert a wallet address into your mail signature (not S/MIME signature but the one under the text) and have clients recognize it as a clickable one. There you go.
That's why someone must fund a glorified overcomplicated parody on SMTP, right?
I have ready answers even though I haven't seen the particular list of questions, but I don't want people to lose the reason to exist. They genuinely believe they're working on something innovative and useful. Truth can be hard.
No one controls email.
Stop asking for permission... the rest of the text is the same.
Host your own email servers and mailing lists. No need to reinvent the wheel.
Damn it, they really are trying to reinvent what I just mentioned: mailing lists.
Today was the first time in my life I had ever mailed anything physically. Ever.
I'm not a merchant, and prefer giving things in person, especially valuable ones.
Are we still talking "user-friendly" or "noob-friendly"? I think an email client is something everyone got used to.
Mailing lists do have web interfaces as well. Essentially, this is how the first Web forums started. Some of them still operate that way.
Topic subscription model also has been working since the beginning. "Following" someone would essentially mean subscribing to their personal feed topic.
Let's get real.
Notes == PGP-signed emails\*.
Relays == mailing list servers.
Feeds == filtered views on those servers.
What's new here, besides all this json/websocket/ecc bloat and cryptobro-hype?
Everyone can run a mailing list server. All this stuff has been around since 1990s.
#NIHsyndrome is so NIH.
\* (offering much more signature options)
I'm still genuinely stunned with the amount of effort some people put into constantly creating problems for themselves and then heroically overcoming them.
It gets, however, much worse if others have to be involved in this too.
Today, I've lost a nice text. Yes, that happens. But the key takeaway from it is: don't blame the FOSS model itself for how it's being used nowadays by the people two generations away from the people who started the movement. Also, even if you have a public repo with an OSI-approved license but all you think about is to how sell yourself with this, then you're not a FOSSer, you're a slut.
Orange Pi Zero + quality Bluetooth adapter + Bluetooth speaker + BlueALSA + mpd = nice Internet-enabled jukebox.
Some of them gambled in 2011 to 2015, and won. And now, they think everyone else should listen to them just because they got lucky that one time.