nbAfter extensive research into decentralized social networks, it is now time for a state of the art 🧵 thread on the subject of #DataSovereignty and its relation to end-to-end encryption and decentralized identity management. For this, I will contrast the two currently most used decentralized social networks protocols: #ActivityPub and #Nostr. #Fediverse #Nomad #Identity #Privacy #E2EE #DPKI #DIDs #SSI 1/11
However, on Nostr, just like in the Fediverse, server administrators (relay operators) are de facto in a superior position because they are in possession of the relayed data and have a kind of gatekeeper function. Users who are not able to set up their own relay are ideally connected to several relays at the same time, but they hand over sovereignty over their data to the operators of the relays and have to trust them. This means that users face the same trust problem as with choosing an instance on the Fediverse, and speaking of Nostr the option for offline data export or local storage of data in the event of a relay shutdown is even less advanced than in the Fediverse. When it comes to gatekeeping, Nostr relay operators are currently facing the same challenge that we face in the Fediverse when it comes to moderating instances: useful mechanisms must be built to keep out spam, illegal content, and malicious actors (however these terms are defined). 5/11
steffenr42@nb thanks for the interesting comparison!
I think an interesting idea popular in the #nostr community is about micropayments. To prevent spam some relay operators require small amounts to use their relays. This might also incentivize people to run relays more professionally or add more costly functionality to them like file hosting as currently discussed in some nips.
Though I'm always a little unsure how inclusive/exclusive these payment based approaches are.
I think an interesting idea popular in the #nostr community is about micropayments. To prevent spam some relay operators require small amounts to use their relays. This might also incentivize people to run relays more professionally or add more costly functionality to them like file hosting as currently discussed in some nips.
Though I'm always a little unsure how inclusive/exclusive these payment based approaches are.
@steffenr42
I'm aware of that, thats why I stated in my thread that having no meta data E2EE for ordinary messages is bad for users privacy and to have that with payment data is even worse. So I'd rather prefer having a protocol that fully e2e encrypts all data, first. And there are protocols who have already managed to do this, see Secure Scuttlebutt (SSB). And no, neither hiding Zaps on the client side nor having a bunch of burner keys does help here.
And let's be precise here, the only thing what the Nostr community is interested in is Bitcoin as a form of micropayments, nothing more, nothing less. And apart from discussions on Bitcoin and how Bitcoiners prefer censorship-restistance over environmental impact, Dorsey and his followers, which is the most of the crowd over at Nostr, would also be perfectly fine with even having a "pay for each event" Nostr implementation.
I argued in my thread that there are parts of the world population who cant even afford a domain name. So now you can imagine how inclusive I think Nostr will be in the future if the Nostr community decides to head the way of more monetization/bitcoinization. And we know how such monetization schemes go if you take a look at the Birdsite right now.
I think the Fediverse with its mostly donation based and voluntarily run infrastructure has already debunked in real practise the notion that admins have to be "incentivized" by earning forced money (e.g. membership fees) on their users. SSB and Fediverse applications have also shown that you can combat spam without having to monetarize relays. But that's not part of my study here anyway, so I wont get into it any further.
I'm aware of that, thats why I stated in my thread that having no meta data E2EE for ordinary messages is bad for users privacy and to have that with payment data is even worse. So I'd rather prefer having a protocol that fully e2e encrypts all data, first. And there are protocols who have already managed to do this, see Secure Scuttlebutt (SSB). And no, neither hiding Zaps on the client side nor having a bunch of burner keys does help here.
And let's be precise here, the only thing what the Nostr community is interested in is Bitcoin as a form of micropayments, nothing more, nothing less. And apart from discussions on Bitcoin and how Bitcoiners prefer censorship-restistance over environmental impact, Dorsey and his followers, which is the most of the crowd over at Nostr, would also be perfectly fine with even having a "pay for each event" Nostr implementation.
I argued in my thread that there are parts of the world population who cant even afford a domain name. So now you can imagine how inclusive I think Nostr will be in the future if the Nostr community decides to head the way of more monetization/bitcoinization. And we know how such monetization schemes go if you take a look at the Birdsite right now.
I think the Fediverse with its mostly donation based and voluntarily run infrastructure has already debunked in real practise the notion that admins have to be "incentivized" by earning forced money (e.g. membership fees) on their users. SSB and Fediverse applications have also shown that you can combat spam without having to monetarize relays. But that's not part of my study here anyway, so I wont get into it any further.