[acdha]

> It has been at absolute worst a minor annoyance.

This is easy to say when there is little adoption and attackers don’t care about the network. It doesn’t mean it’ll remain true if that changes. Proof of work is much less effective when people are willing to use botnets and paid relays complicate life for regular users so there’s a cap on how aggressively that can be used.

[shark_laser]

Proof of Work secures Bitcoin, and people definitely care about that.

[acdha]

How much money have people spent on Bitcoin because of PoW? All those billions were spent because as a speculative vehicle they thought they’d see even greater returns but that doesn’t mean that any other service will see a correspondingly high willingness to spend large amounts of real money.

This is especially challenging in the social space where people are accustomed to not paying and you have significant network effects from anyone being able to sign up for free. Bitcoin’s transaction fees are one of the major reasons why it failed as a currency and that has orders of magnitude fewer messages.

[therein]

You missed the point of what he is saying. The point is, proof of work used to post stuff to relays etc. is not solving the spam issue that Nostr is yet to face due to network effects. Your quip about people care about PoW because bitcoin uses it is just a very unrelated statement that is super off base.

Nostr relays are like Discord "servers" if they were actually servers you could deploy yourself and each client had a cryptographic identity and was used in DMs. You can have the same UI to interact with them all. But they are disjoint. You can interact with people in the channels as long as you subscribe to the same "relay" etc.

Also you keep bringing up Lightning as if it is successful but it is not. It failed in every way. Its model simply does not make sense unless you are a node that receives as much as it sends or sends as much as it receives. You know this yourself if you are a Lightning user. Bitcoin is cool, crypto is cool, even Nostr is cool but some of your statements are conflicting with each other and they aren't making great points.

I tried Nostr but like a lot of people here have been saying, it falls short in many ways due to the way it is structured. Relays are not really relays, they are more but also less. They are like community servers. Sure you can connect to many, have the same UI, but they are still disjoint and feels lonely.

You keep saying you can sign your messages and there is value there to people who are saying it is censorable in the ways they described.

This is not a personal thing, I want to like Nostr and I tried using it. I can and would probably get some use out of using it as a pubsub or message delivery infrastructure for two things I want to connect but what if the relay goes down? It is like a centralized pubsub messagebox thing. But can't even do that fully.

That other guy that said it is just like writing a message, signing it, posting it on X, Facebook, YouTube and BlueSky. People who follow those places can see it. There needs to be some sort of relay to relay communication (actual relaying) that needs to go on. And that wouldn't scale, even if it would work for now.

Protocol itself is simple and nice to have. Could be cool as a transport. The concept is uniquely situated too but using it the way it initially came out as feels like trying to shove a square into a circular hole.

[digitalbase]

I'm building a Nostr app (+- 2mio notes). There is a lot of spam and much worse content.

But it's kinda a solved problem (not through PoW) but through Web of Trust and not having algorithms. You see what the people/communities you follow post.

> I tried Nostr but like a lot of people here have been saying, it falls short in many ways due to the way it is structured. Relays are not really relays, they are more but also less. They are like community servers. Sure you can connect to many, have the same UI, but they are still disjoint and feels lonely.

I'd like to know more. Imho the fact that relays are dumb is a feature.

> You keep saying you can sign your messages and there is value there to people who are saying it is censorable in the ways they described.

All messages are signed. There is no way NOT to sign a message. This comes with the advantage that you don't need to trust the relays/pipes where messages go through which is an immense benefit

> This is not a personal thing, I want to like Nostr and I tried using it. I can and would probably get some use out of using it as a pubsub or message delivery infrastructure for two things I want to connect but what if the relay goes down? It is like a centralized pubsub messagebox thing. But can't even do that fully.

Relays go down all the time. There was an experiment where a major relay (Damus) just deleted the entire dataset. People barely noticed. And as any client (not just the author) and other relays can re-broadcast events the relay eventually recovers.

> There needs to be some sort of relay to relay communication (actual relaying) that needs to go on. And that wouldn't scale, even if it would work for now.

There are three mechanisms that do that:

- clients posts to multiple relays - clients/followers can rebroadcast notes (to other relays) - quite a few relays are syncing (negentropy sync)

[bawolff]

Bitcoin uses proof of work in a very different way then pretty much anyone else.