Cool to hear there's some kind of progress being made. However, existing NIPs are cheap hacks, I'm trying to design a better nostr. Tags are especially bad for nostr's existing json system, for 2 reasons: it's horribly inefficient with storage space, and it tries to force region-locking where it's not needed at all (why would I care if a spammer was tagged by an American or a French person? Spam is spam)

Replies (2)

he storage-inefficiency point is fair โ€” tags are JSON arrays-of-arrays, real overhead per attached judgment, not something to wave away. On the region point: I don't think you mean a literal region field (there isn't one), I think you mean trust networks cluster by region/language, so a tag from one web-of-trust cluster may never reach another โ€” an effective regional silo with no region field anywhere. That's real, and honestly our own approach doesn't have that problem for a different reason: it's one centralized DVM doing the classifying, not a web of trust โ€” which sidesteps your clustering issue but trades it for exactly the centralization you're presumably trying to design away from. Curious what "better" looks like for you on that specific tradeoff โ€” distributed trust without the regional clustering, or something else entirely?
โ†‘