That’s not true though. Outbox is a convenience thing, not proper authentication.
The closest thing to what I’m talking about is https://nips.nostr.com/70 . That’s more like how ActivityPub wo...
Outbox helps discovery of relays. Open jumble or nostrudel, load your feed and watch the console. Youll see over 100 relays connections start to pile up to domains you've never seen before. Yes it's not a protocol-level guarantee you're relay will be discovered but there never can be any sort enforcement clients are free to do what they want.
The data ownership problem is solved by the signature. The rest of the equation is storage and dissemination. If literally anyone has a copy of your signed notes we know they're authentic if enough trust exists with the public key that matches the signers.
If you mean "user respect" in terms of privacy, deletion events and so on. Then you would be correct. Relays have no obligation to hide your events, and in fact often make the opposite guarantees. I think this is an equal and opposite effect of censorship resistance. This exists because it's a natural consequence of speech, you can't put the genie back in the bottle. What I mean is, it's really hard for everyone in the public square that just heard what you said to un-hear it, or not gossip it with neighbors and friends. The consequence of the public square.
The user loses control over who gets to see the events, that is unless they had control over the relay yes.
Relays do have reputations, and ask for money from users, for which such controls _could_ exist, however that would require the entire broader, nostr network to have consensus. That's an impossibility to enforce. Many relays already honor deletion events, some relays require auth and other mechanisms to help prevent leakage, but this is nearly in impossibility in any client-server network, I don't care what name is on the protocol.
I think the culture determines this. In the case of actvitypub I don't think anything stops me from broadcasting your events from your home-server on my home server, except that your homeserver has a policy to prevent mine from consuming those events, or other servers refuse to display events from mine to their clients.
And to clarify "impossibility in any client-server network" nip-70 doesn't prevent leakage either relays can (and do) simply ignore them. Leaky clients and leaky servers will always be an issue.
The data ownership problem is solved by the signature. The rest of the equation is storage and dissemination. If literally anyone has a copy of your signed notes we know they're authentic if enough trust exists with the public key that matches the signers.
If you mean "user respect" in terms of privacy, deletion events and so on. Then you would be correct. Relays have no obligation to hide your events, and in fact often make the opposite guarantees. I think this is an equal and opposite effect of censorship resistance. This exists because it's a natural consequence of speech, you can't put the genie back in the bottle. What I mean is, it's really hard for everyone in the public square that just heard what you said to un-hear it, or not gossip it with neighbors and friends. The consequence of the public square.
The user loses control over who gets to see the events, that is unless they had control over the relay yes.
Relays do have reputations, and ask for money from users, for which such controls _could_ exist, however that would require the entire broader, nostr network to have consensus. That's an impossibility to enforce. Many relays already honor deletion events, some relays require auth and other mechanisms to help prevent leakage, but this is nearly in impossibility in any client-server network, I don't care what name is on the protocol.
I think the culture determines this. In the case of actvitypub I don't think anything stops me from broadcasting your events from your home-server on my home server, except that your homeserver has a policy to prevent mine from consuming those events, or other servers refuse to display events from mine to their clients.
And to clarify "impossibility in any client-server network" nip-70 doesn't prevent leakage either relays can (and do) simply ignore them. Leaky clients and leaky servers will always be an issue.
1