Big Barry Bitcoin on Nostr: Thinking out loud again. Afaik (from #Amethyst anyway) it seems like it is good ...

Thinking out loud again. Afaik (from #Amethyst anyway) it seems like it is good practice to connect to just a few good relays, like maybe 3 or 4.

But I have been thinking about this "censorship resistance" property, and that would suggest that you either run a relay, or you post to as many relays as you can. Also that relays should be freely sharing all the signed data with one another.

This isn't really how nostr works today. I am connected to so many relays and recently connected to another because there were notes quoted that I couldn't see. I have no idea which relays are the best, but I know of 2 that I have paid for.

Let's say a good, reliable relay has been captured and is taken down for no good reason. There can be many relays, but only a few will be quality. How do I find its replacement?!

What if relays kept a list of recommended alternative relays? Not alternative such that all data on one must be on tbe other, but such that this/these other relays are well known and considered reliable to that relay.

If a relay goes down, its data still remains, so before you go from 3 relays to 2 to 1 to dead, you can heal your relay list.

Maybe clients can use these lists if it is standard to auto heal or at least warn the user if a relay seems to be down or unreliable so tbey can patch the issue and improve their experience.

I guess an alternative is to get relay lists from your follows/followers instead of your relays.

What is the current state of relays? Is it solved already and I am being slow? How well do you trust the redundancy of your data? Is your data safe? Is it accessible to everyone you want to be able to see it?