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?
Published at
2024-07-16 01:56:22Event JSON
{
"id": "434834b644b4ce1d330a96a4fbc18d6233ab104b9f282541a2ddbb094129ae2d",
"pubkey": "0d97beae567fcec9c6574f1c6ef6126ea969d4992c3198e51c0fac52c5274a14",
"created_at": 1721087782,
"kind": 1,
"tags": [
[
"t",
"Amethyst"
],
[
"t",
"amethyst"
]
],
"content": "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.\n\nBut 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.\n\nThis 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.\n\nLet'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?!\n\nWhat 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.\n\nIf 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.\n\nMaybe 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.\n\nI guess an alternative is to get relay lists from your follows/followers instead of your relays.\n\nWhat 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? ",
"sig": "352b6c7836cfb87f9ce5be5f4dcd24f066529310bc494d41af4505c55b368aa0ac73deed750f6c8d29cf4e30b8e9b705db5d4f21cef73bb0e5710147a8c40a53"
}