DIY hardware. Maybe not next. Maybe not low hanging fruit. But if you don’t control your own hardware, someone else does. 3D printed circuitry is a given. First for key management, networking, display, etc. Technology has to advance for it to be possible though.
Hm… why do you believe that posts that user finds value in, would get lower attention compared to posts (clickbait, etc) that user finds less value in?
Me personally I would neither like, nor zap and probably click delete on clickbait-shit-posts… and my peers wouldnt get that spam from me.
Users/peers sending me that type of spam I would block or at least downgrade.
If I find users that behave the same, and we help curate the content, why would we get more clickbate/spam?
yes. this! together we create the #protocolSociety
Good observations.
I believe everyone who can, should run their own relay (preferably wrapped as an onion hidden service) and store their own content, to ensure it’s not dropped by the network. If other relays also stores it, then even so much better… but they cant be 100% trusted. Your own relay cant be trusted either (it could break) but you could also store a backup of the content on your hard-drive and re-publish / re-upload, if needed.
We cant expect everyone to run a relay and its likely that content that people find less worthy of saving will be discarded, hence the network is destines to forget some content.
Great feedback and I like the idea of tactile scoring (drag finger).
I agree that we cant expect a user to score all content the user come across. Id argue that this is a feature and not a bug. If the user don’t score some content but score other content, then the scored content is automatically more worthy of attention. One could think of the score not of as a bad/good but as a low/high attention value. SPAM would simply get zero score, because it doesn’t even have negative value… it’s just some sort of nothing-noise.
I believe it’s best if the scoring is “hidden”. Like, repost, content age, zaps, comment, times viewed, bookmarked, etc., are all actions that indicate that a user found a note worthy of attention. Its possible to imagine also other means of scoring such as downvote/upvote, etc.
I agree with your opinion! Very important observation.
And to answer your question: Yes it perfectly suited for the kind of curation you mentioned. I went further… while my proof-of-concept has a suggested default content filtering; the hope is that users would design their own filtering algos using the basic primitives: #opengroups #peercuration #hashscore #tags and I left it open so that more such primitives could be invented and integrated. Instead of a “global content consensus” protocol I made a “local normative” protocol model. Not opinionated. Designed to be re-redesigned. #treebit could have bridges to other networks such as Nostr.
"Every time we introduce new technologies we shape that technology and then it shapes us back. It's this cycle. And so, when we're designing new things we need to think about that cycle." - nostr:npub1wmr34t36fy03m8hvgl96zl3znndyzyaqhwmwdtshwmtkg03fetaqhjg240
Incredible keynote presentation from Nostriga.
information technologies doesn’t have intrinsic properties.
everything you see in this virtual world, is human imagination crystalized into structured energy flow.
the shape of the #protocolSociety is the shape of the best of incentives playing out
And no… paying a small sat fee won’t help here.
Nostr relays are on the shoppin block. Two ways to go: censor notes or goto prison. Is there a 3 way? Yes there is, but people don’t understand because “decentralizing relays” is apparently an IQ test.
Would love to hear your idea! In case you didn’t see my other post, this is my solution https://github.com/baumbit/peercuration?tab=readme-ov-file#peercuration
I did it several years ago, before Nostr existed (in public at least) so I created it for #treebit (a network similar to Nostr, but with spam protection and fully decentralized).
Yes. This.
I already solved the decentralization of relays, when when I designed #treebit and it all is based on #peercuration https://github.com/baumbit/peercuration?tab=readme-ov-file#peercuration
We will all run relays and they will be called nodes. Relays will serve as bridges between network clusters. And content will be filtered by the crowd.
This is #peercuration https://github.com/baumbit/peercuration?tab=readme-ov-file#peercuration
If I follow 3 different profiles, these 3 could be added to a group. If these 3 profiles also follow me, we could create a public group conversation on Nostr. We could even use a tag “3plebsTalk”… Other people who wants to join in, can clone this group. #opengroups
Open because everyone can join, no one can censor, no one can force their way into it. Zero aggression. 100% about whether other people think you add value or not.
Bad behavior is discouraged by not getting attention, good behavior is incentivized by getting attention.
What is good/bad behavior? If you find likeminded people, you already have a like minded opinion of that.
#protocolSociety … this is the way
I want to be able to tag and score the people I follow on Nostr. I also want to group them into #opengroups This way nostr:npub12vkcxr0luzwp8e673v29eqjhrr7p9vqq8asav85swaepclllj09sylpugg would be able to render my notes feed depending on which tags Im interested in and prioritize which content to give real estate.
Several tabs could be offered, a tab for one or several tags. And tabs for a certain group of users.
I don’t want your zaps and sats. Instead donate to yourself by realizing the #protocolSociety, open source it #FOSS and get the strength of the crowd on your side!
Remember, in a free world where protocols is the structure on which society condense and technology crystalize, the winning strategy, is the one where interaction benefits all involved.
”We should be comfortable changing our minds as our inventories of values and knowledge change over time and as the world changes around us” - https://vinneycavallo.com/stances
This is an amazing insight! When I built #treebit, I imagined how every “note” a user posted could be accompanied by a very tiny “update” text, where the author could state whether (s)he had a change of mind or not.
In a system such as Nostr where no content can be verifiably be deleted, there needs to be a way for people to amend old content.
My idea was that users should feel encouraged to update their view of the world, yet we would be able to hold influencers to their promises and not let scammers get away.
Immutable track record (aka git blame) + change of heart (git commit) is how we build the #protocolSociety
he did not. orange was picked because it sticks out.