I seem to be the first person to use 'satoji'.

™️®️🫡🥹🫡🥹🫡

ah ok, nice!

I'm not sure I should write down these thoughts right now while I'm not sure about them, but if you are reading this apparently I did.

I think nostr may already be doomed for two reasons. And as a result of that, if I conclude as such, it would make sense to start working on a successor protocol. I've been taking some notes about what we should change if we started over, but that's the extent of it, I'm not working on a successor protocol. I'm only working on nostr. So don't misinterpret this note, which just represents some thoughts I've been having.

Reason one is the misaligned incentives of note copying. The incentives are to copy your notes to every relay you can, blast them out everywhere, to get more reach. That incentive doesn't go away until and unless all the clients do the outbox model. But they don't have an incentive to change, and there are people who don't give a fuck about fixing this and argue against fixing it and argue for note copying, and there is no way in a free society to make them care. So we can never fix this, and nostr will always be centralized in practice and never what it could have been. That means nostr is doomed and unfixable and we should make sure to start differently next time so this doesn't happen again.

Reason two is that the seed culture of nostr was far too monolithic: bitcoiners. What a culture develops into probably depends on how diverse its seed was. It's quite hard to get people onto nostr unless they are at least very bitcoin tolerant. Most people (yes, I think most) are put off by so much bitcoin promotion and related posts. Certainly people can follow anybody they want, and make their own independent cultures, perhaps even on a disjoint set of relays. But this isn't likely to happen due to the law of large numbers - there are far more ways for them to encounter and interact with the nest of bitcoiners then to not encounter and interact with them.

These are thoughts I'm entirely unsure about. Maybe I'm wrong in both cases. These are my worries.

🖖🛸

I am going to nuke my follow list today and start over.

You can add yourself to this note I will follow you. Unless you’re a spammer 🤷🏻‍♂️

I'll offer an optimistic take on both of your concerns:

1. I believe that most nostr clients will implement some form of outbox support. All Primal clients certainly will. We are literally a few days from releasing a major update. Once users’ notes are spread out over hundreds (eventually thousands) of relays, client devs will be incentivized to upgrade their clients accordingly. It will take a bit of time, but that’s okay.

2. Nostr being seeded with bitcoiners is a feature, not a bug. To bootstrap a truly decentralized network, we need the initial group of users who understand decentralization and are willing to fight for it. There is no other way imho. The short term price we are paying is that the content is bitcoin-centric, but that’s fine. That will get sorted out over time as the network grows.

IMO, we need to lower our time preference and be more patient. Everything is moving in the right direction.

We don’t need a successor protocol. Nostr is the one we’ve been looking for.

social media algorithms are now The MainStream Media

good morning

Need some optimism about #nostr injected into your veins? Read the responses to this thread 👇 Too many to reply to every one but it's amazing hearing everyone's reasons for being here 🔥🔥🔥

nostr:note1922f6c0jxea6urmve7c2cuduyqpcrvyuwngfrartlve6a5qxzsrsnjy6r5

For anyone who needs to hear this, the most updated version of #damus is on the App Store, do not use TestFlight . Enjoy purple, enhanced search etc

Sorry Litecoiners, LTC stands for Coordinated Lunar Time!

Perfect meme for the situation zaps ⚡️ 4u

Im here for the early internet vibes. The people are real. Decentralized human communication.

And hope.

In case no one has nudged you lately, go do that thing you want to do.

It’s waiting for you. ✨

HRF is excited to announce the CISA Research Fellowship 🎉

Cross-Input Signature Aggregation (CISA) is a proposed upgrade to Bitcoin that could potentially enhance privacy and provide cost-savings for transactions

HRF is sponsoring a four-month research fellowship to help analyze the state and future of CISA

The product of the fellowship will be an industry paper that seeks to answer the following questions:

1) How could CISA improve Bitcoin privacy?

2) Exactly how much cost-savings could CISA provide across different types of transactions? This will include a comparison of full versus half aggregate implementations.

3) How meaningful might these cost savings be to different industry participants? Given historical precedent, could these cost savings make Taproot the default script type, as Native Segwit is today?

4) Could CISA, if adopted widely, reduce the effectiveness of chain analysis?

5) Could CISA pave the way for cheaper transactions in a high-fee environment?

6) Could CISA lower the minimum economically spendable account at a given fee rate?

7) Could CISA help exchanges by, for example, saving them money while they consolidate small UTXOs?

8) How does CISA compare to other aggregation strategies?

9) Are there any ways in which CISA could help upgrade or complement the Lightning Network, eCash, or existing CoinJoin mechanisms?

10) How might CISA protect the social and legal choice of Bitcoin users and businesses to CoinJoin, and the likelihood of more CoinJoin behavior, if users could state (if asked) that their decision was based on saving money, not simply seeking more privacy?

11) How would Bitcoin Core need to change to integrate CISA? Are there any known current improvement proposals?

12) How would SegWit need to change to integrate CISA?

13) Could CISA be packaged with (and might it be mutually beneficial with) any existing softfork convent proposals?

14) Would CISA have any impact on output destruction versus creation? How would implementation relate to the witness discount?

15) How problematic would the interactive nature of full aggregate CISA be? What strategies might be adopted to ameliorate this?

16) What would be the main downsides and risks of bringing CISA to Bitcoin?

17) How would a CISA-powered for-profit service that could help people save money on fees, if they are willing to enter an interactive pool, work?

18) What other kinds of CISA-powered apps can be envisioned?

The fellowship is being created with the acknowledgement that CISA may not be a helpful or appropriate addition to Bitcoin, but with the open mind that it might be

The fellow will receive 50 million sats to support their efforts during the research and writing period

The research is expected to be on par with the standards established by bitcoinrollups.org, a previous HRF research fellowship paper reviewing rollup technology

To apply, please email cisafellowship@hrf.org before May 15, 2024

Please include relevant information about your industry or academic background, a research plan in terms of who you will speak to, and your current sense of the impact CISA could have for Bitcoin 🙏

GM

BE THE REBELLION, NOSTR

If you have to hide behind pseudo-intellectual jargon to make your point, you probably don’t have a very strong argument.

The ability to explain simply and clearly is a sign that you actually understand what you’re talking about.

Big words often mask small ideas.

This is especially true when it comes to the topics of money and economics.