-
@ Constant
2025-05-27 08:23:58Understanding or grasping Nostr can be deceptively difficult. At the very least it is non-trivial. At first glance, looking at NIP-01, the protocol is rather straight forward. But those are just the basics; yes the beauty of Nostr is its ‘simplicity’, but that does not mean the system that results from it is not complex. Conway's Game of Life only has a hand full of rules, yet you can, in theory at least, create any complex system imaginable. And this is where the deception lies; the less you define from the outset, the more you imply on what follows.
It appears that as it stands, Nostr suffers from this deceptiveness. You can reason through all these implications, but that is still an exercise that has to be performed and where mistakes can be made. Worse, this exercise has been a group effort from the start that is still in progress. Currently there is no clear cut ‘authoritative’ example of all the implications that have been ‘discovered’ thus far.
A good example of the implications following Nostr’s primitives is what we now refer to as the ‘outbox model’. The reason we ‘now’ refer to it as such, is because initially it was called the ‘Gossip model’ derived from the client that first implemented the idea. Outbox is fundamental to Nostr, but it was never explicitly stated in the initial protocol description. The result is that roughly five years into this Nostr endeavor, it is still not universally implemented; worse yet, some developers appear to be in no rush to do so. Now the reason they will give you is probably one based on priority, yet I can’t shake the feeling that they apparently don’t ‘get it’.
My point here is not to play some blame game or hold anyone to account. I am just concluding they don’t actually get the new paradigm that we have all stumbled into. To expand on this specific outbox example, its significance only becomes really apparent further along in the ‘reasoning through all the implications’ exercise. In relation to one aspect, but there are more: The point is not ‘just’ censorship-resistance for users, but the freedom for relays that comes with it to apply whatever policy on what they store and make available; it is this discrimination or curation that can add value by making finding relevant information easier in a straightforward manner. But it relies on outbox to avoid isolation; something that only becomes apparent once you are reasoning through all the implications on how we discover and consume content.
To be clear, this piece is not supposed to a crusade on the outbox model, my point here is that there is an inherent logic to Nostr stemming from putting cryptography front and center. It is a logic that has to be applied and will subsequently carry you through all the challenges we face in reconstructing the entirety of the web. This is not to say there is only one obvious path, and different schools of thought are bound to emerge. But it behooves us all, faced with this new paradigm, to continuously reflect on the mental image we have cultivated of what Nostr is; actively re-performing that exercise of exploring the implications this simple set of protocol rules creates.
Unfortunately I can not escape my own folly. After all, I am just an armchair asshole that never wrote a single line of code in his life. Obviously this minds-eye bullshit is not even half the story, the bulk of the effort is translating it into software, the tangible, the real. It is in that effort ultimately the real exploration of this paradigm occurs. All I can do is build castles in the sky.