[HN Gopher] Nostr ("Notes and Other Stuff Transmitted by Relays"...
___________________________________________________________________
Nostr ("Notes and Other Stuff Transmitted by Relays") - An
Introduction
Author : Logans_Run
Score : 113 points
Date : 2023-04-24 17:31 UTC (5 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (wiki.wellorder.net)
(TXT) w3m dump (wiki.wellorder.net)
| mikae1 wrote:
| Can somebody recommend a free relay for kicking the tires?
| leesalminen wrote:
| wss://no.str.cr
| mikae1 wrote:
| Thanks!
| djschnei wrote:
| Ideally you'll connect to several relays
| SnowProblem wrote:
| I wish Nostr were invented 30 years ago because it seems like a
| elegant protocol with room for extensions that could have served
| as the backend language for Twitter, IRC, FB, and more. But
| network effects are just so powerful and people post to be seen.
| Twitter isn't going to willingly open the door to competitors,
| and so I hope Nostr can find a few unique use cases and
| communities to let it blossom.
| klabb3 wrote:
| I.. agree, but I don't think recreating existing platforms is a
| good idea either in FOSS or commercial projects. As you say,
| it's already there.
|
| > Network effects are just so powerful and people post to be
| seen.
|
| Yeah, but those people aren't moving the needle anyway, so they
| can be safely ignored, for now. They'll come when it gets
| popular or trendy (see the recent mastodon influx).
|
| Current gen social media is clearly not the end-all be-all.
| It's riddled with problems, both because of the business model
| which incentivizes short-termism like clickbait, but also
| inherent problems in the social graph, feeds, etc. We've had at
| least a decade of experience to learn from the mistakes of the
| giants. Maybe this sounds elitist, but whenever I see a Twitter
| clone (say current gen Mastodon or Substack Notes) all I see is
| a lack of creativity and courage to face novel opportunities.
| neilk wrote:
| > Resilience is provided by the protocol being simple enough to
| implement in a weekend, in your language of choice. Platform
| lock-in is impossible, since any client can republish any note to
| a different relay if one misbehaves or enacts a disagreeable
| policy.
|
| That's a wonderful sentiment but we said the same thing about the
| web and email and both are effectively controlled by large
| companies.
|
| Twitter is centralized due to being the creation of a single
| company, but that's not the fundamental problem.
|
| The web and email got effectively centralized because distributed
| protocols create problems of search, filtering, abuse, identity,
| community continuity, etc. You can't easily solve them in a
| distributed way, and even if you _can_, you can't easily get
| everyone in the network to upgrade. Hence, providers arise that
| say "We're Nostr, only better!(tm)" or "We're the best way to
| find what you want on Nostr!" and they work on locking in their
| customers.
|
| If you want to be resilient to monopolization you have to show
| how you're going to solve those other problems.
| leesalminen wrote:
| A big topic of conversation at nostrica (nostr's first
| conference) last month was how to maintain decentralization.
| One of the biggest concerns was having a client or relay
| provider build features outside of the protocol to gain market
| share and enable them to lock-in users.
|
| You are correct that there is no easy solution to these
| problems. There are draft NIPs that attempt to solve many of
| the problems you've described. You're welcome to join us in the
| conversation and work with us to try and solve these hard
| problems!
|
| https://github.com/nostr-protocol/nips/pulls
|
| PS- I don't think the web is effectively controlled by large
| companies. Email is a different story though. Hopefully we can
| build nostr to be more like the web than email.
| oh_sigh wrote:
| Maybe nostr needs a Law of Jante/tall poppy lopper - any
| client or relay that gets too special gets
| blacklisted/punished by all the other clients/relays (to the
| extent possible through the protocol). Sorry if that is in a
| NIPS, there are 84 in that link and I can't read through them
| all.
| Logans_Run wrote:
| To be clear: I am the submitter not the author. The link is
| just something I stumbled across while browsing
| ReclaimTheNet.
| irusensei wrote:
| The identity is controlled by a cryptographic key on the client
| side so even if you get kicked of a server you and whoever is
| in contact with you can just grab your data from other relays.
| dangoor wrote:
| > The web and email got effectively centralized...
|
| Woah there. I don't agree with this. The web is certainly not
| centralized (this is on Hacker News and not Facebook, right?)
| It follows a power law distribution where you have some players
| getting lots of traffic and then there are lots and lots of
| small traffic sites. But it's definitely decentralized.
|
| _Google_ is something of a monopoly providing some of the
| features you list for the web at large, but there are others
| (Duck Duck Go, Bing) that are just a click away.
|
| Gmail took a huge share of the email market by being a better
| product for the first several years of its existence (and being
| free also helped). That doesn't mean email is centralized: I've
| been using Fastmail for the last several years and it works
| _just fine_. I don't have the problems you list.
|
| Anyhow, I agree with your point that a decentralized _social
| network_ needs to solve the problems you're listing. I just
| think the web and email are actually examples of technologies
| that remain decentralized.
| rektide wrote:
| Here here!
|
| As a web developer, I think we've figured out maybe 1% of
| what the web is good for & capable of. There's still so much
| possibility, so many options, that _any given person_ can go
| off & explore & play around with & succeed on. The field has
| never been more open for, more ready for new exciting
| possibilities, better set to start changing if we can make a
| real authentic honest outreach to users, that is a fair shake
| from tech, & not leaving cloud-giants holding all the cards &
| us with a couple magic beans.
|
| The doom & gloom look at the macro of what the web is is
| really sad. It's a constant pity party. The ability to
| control & shape our information spaces to our liking & pick
| our paths has never been higher, has only gotten better as
| more protocols & standards, focused at purer social
| networking levels than the web medium at large, have arisen.
|
| As a developer, it's been a one way street with us crafting
| better and better means of web development and deployment
| every single year, and what we're excitingly starting to see
| is more genuine & personal involvement not just with creating
| sites, but with creating interconnection, creating interlink,
| creating intermedia, not just on one big property, but across
| many voices. Nostr highlighting the idea of a relay, that who
| we relay is a vote of amplification, is semi-covert social
| commentary on picking your traffic, on selecting what gets to
| get shared out. There's no headier better more promising time
| than today (and the web continues to be the premier
| delightful connectable blank slate from with which to
| experiment & iterate).
| drexlspivey wrote:
| Email is centralized in the sense that you might run your own
| server/domain but if Google decides you are bad and stops
| federating with you you might as well not exist. Who are you
| going to exchange mail with if most people are on Gmail?
|
| That's very different than Google banning your account where
| you can just switch to Bing for search.
| jrm4 wrote:
| I think your "effectively controlled" is mostly meaningless.
|
| There's orders of magnitude of difference between "started off
| as scattered and big companies now do a majority of the
| maintenance" vs actually CENTRALIZED, like Twitter.
|
| My website and my email, from my domain, both exist generally
| as equals without any meaningfully strong influence from google
| or whatnot, e.g. censoring my website would be a practically
| completely different thing from the ridiculous mess that
| Twitter is becoming (if it isn't already.)
| redder23 wrote:
| Email is not "controlled" by large companies. People choose to
| use large companies and let them read their emails because they
| are stupid. Email has not evolved in any way BECAUSE its NOT
| controlled by some company. If Google could, they would do even
| more evil with email that "just" reading all your mails.
|
| To compare Twitter with email makes absolutely no sense. Yes
| Twitter is a totally controlled thing by a single company,
| email is not. You could say it for the web when it comes to net
| neutrality and where it does not exist anymore ...
| Logans_Run wrote:
| Rebuttal/response to/of your comment/thought/input. From the
| Wiki -
|
| _I ran across Nostr when I was looking for an excuse to do
| some network programming. I have a thing for small standards,
| and the Nostr spec was 75 lines of exactly what I was looking
| for._
| cube2222 wrote:
| In a similar vain, I'm curious how Bluesky[0] will pan out. The
| protocol looks very cool with how much it separates and
| distributes the different concerns[1] (storage, recommendations,
| clients, etc.) as opposed to something "federated but fairly
| monolithic" like Mastodon.
|
| [0]: https://blueskyweb.xyz/
|
| [1]: https://atproto.com/docs
| tough wrote:
| I've been curious about BlueSky too, popping a lot on Twitter
| lately, but it's hard to secure an invite
| cube2222 wrote:
| Iirc the waitlist is packed (million or so) and they've only
| let in 20k so far while they're working on scaling moderation
| (which is pluggable as well, I think).
|
| Some info in the interview by TheVerge[0].
|
| [0]: https://www.theverge.com/23686778/bluesky-ceo-jay-
| graber-int...
| tough wrote:
| Lol seems easier to get hired than invited by those
| numbers, I'll join the matrix channel and see what's up
| there
| apsurd wrote:
| > Software for chatting on the Internet should be small and fun.
|
| Small and fun is the magic here. There's immense product insight
| in building a product experience that feels really small,
| intimate. It's the counterbalance to the unwieldy scale of Big
| Tech.
|
| We're in the natural cycle of things, I'm just saying I seem to
| really get the feeling "the future is small", if that makes
| sense. It's quite stressful to navigate the entire planet's
| information and inventory.
| CrampusDestrus wrote:
| what is this obsession with products being "fun" to use?
|
| you know what makes chatting fun? the people I'm chatting with.
|
| you know what makes chatting not fun? being impeded from
| chatting with the fun people.
|
| a chat program that has fun people and always works is the most
| fun to use!
| apsurd wrote:
| i agree, it's fun because of the people. a product is "not
| fun" when it impedes on those personal connections. like the
| obvious thing of injecting ads everywhere, a product doing
| that, is not fun in my view. it's infuriating
| leesalminen wrote:
| I feel the same way. I don't feel the need or desire to be
| connected to every single person on earth through some app. I
| left almost all social platforms a couple years ago (except
| HN).
|
| I got into nostr and feel like it's almost exactly what I want
| from social media. Just a reverse chronological feed of the
| people I follow.
| breck wrote:
| What is the best Nostr web client?
| jonstaab wrote:
| https://coracle.social is the one I work on, and I think it's
| pretty good. It does more to surface relays as a first-class
| thing than most.
| leesalminen wrote:
| That's pretty subjective. I happen to like astral, though many
| say it's too slow for them. I think a lot of people are using
| coracle, snort.social, and iris. There are a lot of other ones
| under active development.
| dgerges wrote:
| Super elegant vision. Would love this to gain traction.
| eykanal wrote:
| Saying "I don't want censorship" is equivalent to saying "I'm
| fine with people using my tool for coffee meetups, genocide
| planning, bridge club, and drug deals." It's an attempted
| handwashing of moral responsibility under the cover of software
| purity.
|
| At this point, it's pretty well documented that social media _as
| a tool_ has increased young female mental illness; the question
| is only "how much" [1]. To try to wave away responsibility for
| this by saying "but I'm just making a tool!" is beyond
| irresponsible at this point; it's morally reprehensible.
|
| [1]: https://jonathanhaidt.substack.com/p/social-media-mental-
| ill...
| saprolino wrote:
| > media _as a tool_ has increased young female mental illness
|
| Why should this be solved by discouraging censorship-resistant
| tools?
| afunctionof wrote:
| [dead]
| throw101010 wrote:
| > "I'm fine with people using my tool for coffee meetups,
| genocide planning, bridge club, and drug deals." It's an
| attempted handwashing of moral responsibility under the cover
| of software purity.
|
| None of these activities are efficiently stopped by censorship
| on the largest social media platforms... so what are you
| suggesting? That we continue to employ inefficient censorship
| (which gets also abused all the time by governments around the
| world), or do you have any actual solution? If not, this sounds
| a lot like virtue signalling to me.
| dahwolf wrote:
| The elephant in the room here is that quite likely a large
| part of content that may contribute to female mental illness
| is not hateful.
|
| I'm of course talking about female influencers on Instagram
| flexing their wealth, highly customized looks, hot
| boyfriends, fancy holidays, etc. The phenomenon where a young
| girl at her most vulnerable/insecure age is ranking against
| this distorted image of filter-laden "expectations" is brand
| new.
|
| My point being, there's a huge amount of content that is bad
| for our mental health, yet cannot be censored because the
| harm is indirect.
| irusensei wrote:
| Bad take. Good software has to be used by anti-abortion
| activists and abortion clinics.
| b3nji wrote:
| Arguably, the erosion of mental health could be laid at the
| feet of greedy corporations using algos to push hate, and
| division for eyeballs to advertisers.
|
| Isn't Nostr algo free? Isn't it just a messaging service?
| leesalminen wrote:
| Yes, nostr is just a protocol. There is no inherent
| algorithm. A client could choose to implement one and users
| could then choose to just migrate to a different client
| without one. All I want is a reverse chronological feed of
| posts from people I follow. That's it. And right now the
| nostr clients deliver that.
| blueberrychpstx wrote:
| Social media as a tool strikes me as the same kind of argument
| as "REAL socialism hasn't been tried yet"
|
| It doesn't feel at all to me that there are any social media
| platforms that function at all like tools but rather data
| vampires attempting to addict at any cost" and so Haidt's
| mention of increased suicide rate is unfortunately not at all a
| surprise.
|
| Sorry if this sounds harsh but calling platforms in the
| zeitgeist at this moment in time as tools is simply naive.
| leesalminen wrote:
| nostr isn't a platform though, it's a protocol. Something
| closer to SMTP than to Facebook. Go build a little something
| on it (there are decent libraries for popular languages at
| this point which makes it easy) and see for yourself. It
| doesn't feel like a platform, it feels like a tool.
| scsibug wrote:
| It is a tool for communication. We can build a twitter clone
| on it, a chess match server, IoT messaging, etc. Nostr-the-
| protocol is a proper tool. Agreed that the social aspects
| built on top of it should be built with human wellbeing in
| mind - not ad revenue.
|
| Hopefully having the nostr protocol in place lets people
| iterate faster to build good social technology, and
| accelerates moving past the ad/engagement focused platforms
| we live with today.
| mikae1 wrote:
| I see a problem. I'd say a majority of the posts on Nostr are
| media posts (mostly images) and the network relies on Imgur and
| other image hosting services for all content. Not very
| decentralized in practice.
| psychlops wrote:
| The problem is that a decentralized service links to a
| centralized service?
| mikae1 wrote:
| https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35692399
| rektide wrote:
| Is it a problem? Right now it doesn't seem to be a practical
| problem.
|
| I agree that where we're headed, it seems like services like
| this will only continually degrade, that a huge amount of the
| corporate-run internet is undergoing radical #enshittification
| at an alarming rate, & the nation-states have strapped
| afterburners onto this hellbound-sled by starting to make the
| terms of use for these already imperfect the feudal- oops i
| mean corporate- data-keeps.
|
| New age-verification identity-verification to post stuff has
| scaled up with shock & awe speeds, with Imgur just burning down
| huge swarths of the internet. So I guess yeah it has become a
| practical problem alraedy.
|
| Oh and there's other signs of horror/intensification all about.
| Specs like Mobile Document Request opening up the Jevon's
| paradox of making it easier to request government id online are
| going to make a very shitty 203X's that greatly piss over the
| internet legacy we have. https://github.com/WICG/mobile-
| document-request-api/issues/6
|
| But also... we have the saints of human history,
| https://archive.org, ticking along doing the good deeds. The
| more rag-tag ArchiveTeam folks. They keep saying it's not for
| archiving, but I really hope WebPackage / WebBundle specs take
| off, that we build a norm of take-away sites that we can
| retain. (Caveat: right now Chrome has zero interest in letting
| you use old snapshots, but I have zero faith this limited
| security totalitarianism will hold, given that Certificate
| Transparency lets us know that indeed this content did come
| from X site at Y time & had the right cert then.)
|
| In general, it's all the web, so it only sort of matters that
| the thing goes away. We need to update the maxim, "Cool URIs
| Dont Change" (https://www.w3.org/Provider/Style/URI). Sometimes
| the resources go away. But the URI remains. And we can spread
| backups, share the content, even when the hosts vanish, because
| the web is so cool like that.
| mikae1 wrote:
| _> Is it a problem? Right now it doesn 't seem to be a
| practical problem._
|
| It will be the day these image hosting services die (and they
| do, all the time). This setup separates the post content from
| the post itself. I hope that most of us remember what a giant
| mess hosting images for forums on free image hosting services
| (that were later shut down) caused.
|
| Apparently there was a discussion just a few days ago about
| Imgur deleting images that are not associated with a user
| account[1]. Just imagine all the broken image embeds that
| will cause...
|
| [1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35636190
| rektide wrote:
| this reply feels 1 step behind my post.
|
| i already mentioned imgur. i already spent a while talking
| through how we adapt & deal with this. i tend to think the
| way forward isn't to change our user behavior or the
| pattern, but to layer user-sovereign resilience atop the
| web, which we already have wonderful examples of aplenty.
|
| the _Axioms of Web Architecture_ help us cope & iterate
| with emerging situations well, are a strong start for
| resilience layers.
| https://www.w3.org/DesignIssues/Axioms.html
|
| and reciprocally, i'm not saying it's a solved problem
| either.
| anarchogeek wrote:
| There's a new nip to cover the metadata for images and media
| including being able to use torrents for file hosting.
|
| https://github.com/nostr-protocol/nips/blob/master/94.md
| leesalminen wrote:
| It's weird how "decentralized" means something different to
| every individual. Having the ability to choose where to host my
| images is what I'd call decentralized.
| kvathupo wrote:
| As I understand it, the raison d'etre of nostr is to use
| relays to store your data, which is presented on clients. So
| if a front-end bans you, then you can grab your data off any
| relay. If imgur shuts down, you're out of luck!
|
| Bluesky goes further with the AT protocol for more general
| data and algorithms iirc
| drexlspivey wrote:
| Relays don't (have to) store your data, they relay in real
| time via websockets. Clients should store the data if they
| care about persistence
| kevingadd wrote:
| And as it happens, imgur is revising their TOS and deleting
| a bunch of content
| mikae1 wrote:
| Perhaps the greatest problem with this setup is that the post
| content is separate from the post itself. I hope that most of
| us remember what a giant mess hosting images for forums on
| free image hosting services (that were later shut down)
| caused.
| dekervin wrote:
| I've tried using snort.social , dog testing it with the intent of
| recommanding it, but it's basically unusable. Would someone have
| a good web interface to recommand?
| jonstaab wrote:
| https://coracle.social is the client I work on. It's less well-
| known, but is pretty feature-complete.
| dekervin wrote:
| Nice to meet you. First time I hear about coracle.social .
| The main issue I had with snort is that it takes a lot of
| time before taking an action into account. It's a non starter
| for non-geeky people.
| snuckr wrote:
| I think the most usable web clients are primal.net,
| coracle.social, and iris.to
| leesalminen wrote:
| https://www.nostr.net maintains a list of all known clients. I
| am a bit partial to astral, though it is resource intensive.
| You could try coracle, snort, or iris to see if they're more
| your fancy.
| scsibug wrote:
| Nice (blog author here); just heard this showed up on the
| frontpage from someone on Nostr.
|
| If I was writing an update to this, I'd probably point out how
| much better the clients (especially mobile) have gotten, in such
| a short span of time. As well as how lightning integration (zaps)
| are letting us build new capabilities (instead of just cloning
| twitter) that don't exist anywhere else.
| Logans_Run wrote:
| Glad its getting traction, it was a fun read and introduced me
| to something new (tm). One issue I had about 'Zaps' was the
| 'pay-to-play' aspect which seemed in discord/disharmony with
| the OG vision of _Solving the Right Problems
|
| There is no blockchain. No proprietary social sign-in. No
| "real-name policy" No distributed hash table, onion routing,
| raft consensus, or peer-to-peer protocol. There is just a
| method of providing simple digitally signed text, and a simple,
| scalable search service._
|
| I mean I get it aaannnndd 54 lines of Spec etc and there is a
| need for something like you offer/describe and I'm glad to have
| stumbled across the link that lead to this blog that leads to
| the GH <phew!>
| scsibug wrote:
| Lightning already exists; so it is nice that a simple
| protocol can integrate with it. I view them as complementary
| - it is good that Nostr does not need crypto, but it is still
| cool that they can harmonize without changing the core
| protocol.
|
| It does solve a fundamental incentive problem of "who runs
| big relays".
| EGreg wrote:
| How is this different than Secure Scuttlebutt? I remember
| following that for a while. Dominic Tarr invented that.
|
| Also Dat / Hypercore from Matthias Mullie, powering Beaker
| Browser
| evbogue wrote:
| After using Nostr a bit, I don't think there's a huge
| difference between SSB and it except that Nostr has no blob
| sync and they abandoned append-only logs and use different
| signing key cryptography.
|
| Scuttlebutt just suffers from an inaccessible implementation at
| the moment, but there is a team coming together to make a
| working implementation again.
| leesalminen wrote:
| Nostr's GitHub page discusses the issues with SSB.
|
| https://github.com/nostr-protocol/nostr#the-problem-with-ssb...
| anarchogeek wrote:
| Here's a good write-up comparing SSB and Nostr.
|
| https://mattlorentz.com/weblog/2023/01/18/nostr-v-ssb.html
| Zamicol wrote:
| In my mind, key rotation is foundational, and neither system
| appears to support that.
| evbogue wrote:
| You just generate a new key and link to it with your old
| key.
| packetlost wrote:
| As a crypto-skeptic (lol), I _really_ like Nostr. Unfortunately,
| I don 't think it will catch on until someone takes the time to
| shave off the sharp technical edges and figure out spam +
| identity verification. The current Nostr network is full of cult-
| like bitcoin cryptobros, racist Twitter/Fediverse refugees, and
| spam. Lots, and _lots_ of spam. But the technology is cool af and
| could be made into something more.
| fossuser wrote:
| Yeah, partly why I think you need something like Urbit's ID
| system to counter spam.
|
| Though I'm biased and just generally like the urbit approach
| more.
| leesalminen wrote:
| I've switched over to only private and/or paid relays and don't
| experience any spam whatsoever. Not that this is the best
| solution to spam, but it has been effective.
| packetlost wrote:
| I host my own relay and it's stupid easy to set up. The
| problem then becomes relay discovery, which is an almost
| completely unsolved problem. I do think it will get there in
| though.
| [deleted]
| leesalminen wrote:
| Check out the gossip client [0]. They take a unique stab at
| dealing with relay discovery. NIP-65 [1] also attempts to
| deal with this. Hopefully clients will start implementing
| this shortly.
|
| [0] https://github.com/mikedilger/gossip
|
| [1] https://github.com/nostr-
| protocol/nips/blob/master/65.md
| jonstaab wrote:
| https://coracle.social (my web client) implements relay
| discovery as well.
| nine_k wrote:
| I have to repeat my most important concern about Nostr from ~3
| months ago[1]: Nostr makes you forward data from strangers
| unencrypted. If anything unlawful which you forward for Nostr is
| ever found on your computer, or found transmitted from your
| computer, you'd have fun time to explain to the authorities how
| it even ended up on your machine, and why are you disseminating
| it.
|
| Encryption is not trivially easy to introduce into this scheme,
| and it can't be too seamless. It's possible though, and I
| encourage the developers to work on that.
|
| [1]: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34529931
| Multicomp wrote:
| Between this new tool and https://github.com/simplex-
| chat/simplex-chat I am starting to feel like (at least from my
| filter bubble) that the web may be slightly starting to think
| about maybe someday turning the corner on centralized-by-default
| model for building new applications.
|
| And/or it's just my first time seeing a complete pendulum swing
| on the apocryphal mainframe-pc-mainframe-pc cycle.
| meibo wrote:
| Anything Jack is involved in is tainted for me until further
| notice. I wouldn't even dare to touch any of his new platforms,
| seeing his connections with Elon and how his judgement failed so
| spectacularly with the Twitter deal - it's not worth it, just to
| be sold out again when he gets bored of it or it doesn't end up
| being a business. At least he admitted to it.
|
| I'm not saying Mastodon is the solution, but at least no one can
| take it away from me at a whim or has full control over the
| protocol and the app.
| leesalminen wrote:
| > how his judgement failed so spectacularly with the Twitter
| deal
|
| A CEO doesn't approve an acquisition in a publicly traded
| company. The Board of Directors decide.
|
| > or has full control over the protocol and the app.
|
| Jack does not have any control over the nostr protocol.
|
| He may arguably have some control over one of the iOS client
| apps (due to him finding the dev), but that's about it.
|
| I was an organizer of nostrica (nostr's first conference) last
| month. Yes, Jack paid for the venue, food & merch but he didn't
| ask for anything in return.
|
| He was very humble about the whole thing. More than I thought
| he would be.
| meibo wrote:
| > A CEO doesn't approve an acquisition in a publicly traded
| company. The Board of Directors decide.
|
| Don't put words in my mouth. It may not entirely have been
| his decision, but nobody forced him to go on Twitter to say
| that he "chose him" and that he "believes it with all his
| heart"[0]. You cannot possibly tell me that you think that he
| was uninvolved in setting up the deal. Him being friends with
| Elon for ages is public track record.
|
| > Jack does not have any control over the nostr protocol.
|
| Jack is bankrolling the founder of the protocol with more
| than $240k. If you think that a SV CEO is doing that because
| he wants to create a better world, good on you. If you have
| any evidence that that doesn't give him any control, I'd be
| happy to see it. I feel like it's valid to be a little
| sceptical.
|
| [0] https://theprint.in/tech/jack-dorsey-says-elon-musk-is-
| singu...
| leesalminen wrote:
| The recipient of that donation (@fiatjaf) immediately split
| it 50/50 with the developer of Damus (@jb55). All
| distributions have been done in public. At last check,
| fiatjaf has already dispersed 70% of the donation to other
| people/groups.
|
| fiatjaf has been a prominent developer in the Bitcoin
| community for many years. Think what you may about crypto
| bros, fiatjaf is not that. I've had the pleasure of working
| with him a bit & have been on the receiving end of debates
| with him. I've always found him to be an upstanding person
| with deeply rooted ethics, even if I regularly disagree
| with him. If $240k were enough to sway him to do something
| he thought was wrong, Bitcoin would've been destroyed
| already.
|
| I understand where you're coming from, though. If I didn't
| know the players and hadn't followed along (on nostr)
| intently throughout, I would likely have the same concerns
| as you. I still do, to some extent. Though my personal
| experiences and interactions with these people has helped
| assuage most of it.
| drexlspivey wrote:
| > If $240k were enough to sway him to do something he
| thought was wrong, Bitcoin would've been destroyed
| already.
|
| How could fiatjaf destroy Bitcoin if he wanted to? He is
| not even a contributor in Bitcoin Core.
| irusensei wrote:
| > If you have any evidence that that doesn't give him any
| control, I'd be happy to see it
|
| Here you go: https://github.com/nostr-protocol/nostr/nips
|
| Not joking it's a protocol and clients decide what
| standards they want to implement.
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2023-04-24 23:00 UTC)