There is an overhead of about 50%+
For comparison, TLS over IPv6 over WireGuard over IPv6 has an overhead of 11% View quoted note →
Login to reply
Replies (12)
Depends on how big your packet is.
I assumed relatively large packets
Then you're wrong.
You forgot about the part where it has to go through the same internet you claim to replace
I don't claim anything stupid like that.
There’s what you say and there’s what people interpret it as from your display of it.
I’m still trying to find a benefit compared to I2P and the likes which can also have on-device or hosted entry points, actually has proper analysis and optimization of privacy and performance, and has less overhead
I don't care about what people interpret. point me to an inaccuracy I've said and I'll revise.

Nostr is perfect for bootstraping a Web of Trust with shitposts. It sucks on a technical level for everything else.
Just because we can, does not mean we should. Not everything should be built on nostr.
There is an overhead of about 50%+
For comparison, TLS over IPv6 over WireGuard over IPv6 has an overhead of 11% View quoted note →
View quoted note →
cook 🚀
if you can pay for relaying and it's only used for broadcasting notes without leaking origin information then it's awesome
only way to do that is with micro accounts bootstrapped through multiple hops, then you "spend" your credit with your traffic, and the payment and traffic are isolated and the origin and destination of notes is obfuscated
ecash isn't suitable for this because the mint sees the buyer and seller of tokens location, has to be done using microaccounts
Another strange project like eCash.