[jb55]

Hey, author of https://damus.io here (ios twitter-like nostr client)

> First, I want a replication strategy. Nostr messages get lost in time, and many of the clients end up just blasting an entire message history at your client. Because there's no clue in the protocol how messages are related other than a timestamp this also means you can fake timestamps and write fake messages in the future or back in time

You can do this with email or git too and it doesn't make it any less useful. I actually like the backdating feature as it allows you to copy your account to a new key.

As for replication, at damus I am working on https://github.com/damus-io/nostrdb which is intended to be a "sqlite for nostr". I plan on implementing set-reconciliation based syncing with strfry relays (using a technique called negentropy), so that replication is very efficient.

> Second, I don't like that many Nostr clients are using the same signing key for messages as they do for lightning transactions.

This is simply not true.

> Third, someone needs to delete some of these NIPS. The arms race to make Nostr as complex and difficult as possible to implement is not going to do much for the ecosystem in the long run. In the beginning Nostr was simple to implement from scratch, they should get back to that!

All nips are optional except for nip01, you can ignore them all for the most part.

> Fourth, it needs a dedicated blob store protocol. Yah, I know IPFS isn't great but someone should come up with something that is simple and works.

It does not, in the same way email or git or any text-based protocol doesn't need a dedicated blob store. These are separate concerns and they should be a separate protocol. nostr clients can of course integrate and link to any blob store it wants via new NIPs that describe this. I believe there are a few already in the nips repo.

Cheers!

[3np]

> > First, I want a replication strategy. Nostr messages get lost in time, and many of the clients end up just blasting an entire message history at your client. Because there's no clue in the protocol how messages are related other than a timestamp this also means you can fake timestamps and write fake messages in the future or back in time

> You can do this with email or git too and it doesn't make it any less useful.

In the sense that you can fake timestamps, you're of course correct on git and anything else beyond public blockchains.

In the other sen, git is a counter-example of what I take the author's main point to be, in that commits do have an mandated relationship and linkage that Nostr noted don't.

[satvikpendem]

> Hey, author of https://damus.io here (ios twitter-like nostr client)

Haha, like Nostradamus, very clever name!

[entropie]

missed the opportunity to nostra.damu.us ?

That remembers me off project.ioni.st and now iam sad.

[evbogue]

> > Second, I don't like that many Nostr clients are using the same signing key for messages as they do for lightning transactions.

> This is simply not true.

I'm sorry if I'm wrong about this one. How does it work?

[jb55]

Zaps just put a signed nostr note inside a lightning invoice so that clients can show that a specific user send some amount of money to some note or profile. clients request lightning invoices via lnurl (an http lightning specification). You could do the same thing for any other fiat or crypto system if you want to, but nostr was mainly build by bitcoiners which is why there is lots of bitcoin tech integrated, but its completely optional.