Damus
Pedro · 182w
Qual a vantagem, combater spam?
Unhosted Marcellus · 182w
Requiring PoW for a like or a zap seems a bit excessive. Now, for a new post/reply... ๐Ÿ‘€
Ian "nostr.naut.social" D · 182w
For what purpose? If rate limiting, who not simply enforce time delays that escalate with volume. 1s,2s,3s,5s,7s,10s and resets after 1min of no posts
nobody · 182w
No. Adoption and openness to developing countries and access to those who are unbanked and marginalized should be made as easy and free as possible! IMO. Something like this demanding more data, power etc makes the solution further away. I like the idea behind this but not the result.
398ja · 182w
Not necessarily for liking, zapping etc, but replying only?
Don't Believe The Vibe ๐ŸŒฑ๐Ÿ‹๐ŸŠ · 182w
What's a use case? I don't think more battery draining is something I want on social media, but maybe I just can't see what it would be good for.
gandlaf21 · 182w
my phone batter is already dying when browsing nostr. RIP when activating PoW
Gzuuus · 182w
Can be optional, its good to have the option in case pow it's needed
Jeroen โœ… · 182w
Awesome! Post&repost, YES Likes, idk, want liking to be quick right?
Cosmic Dimension · 182w
Seems fine to me. I can imagine myself frying my phone with it.
Modus · 182w
I would love to be able to have lists of people I follow, so I see a feed of just a subset of my friends.
Dieter Lenaerts · 182w
I would give people the option between sats and proof of work. In this way none bitcoiners can also enjoy a spam free environment and bitcoiners are not bothered with this process.
cloud fodder · 182w
It would be a very useful feature to have as long as it's configurable. I think PoW could be used to deter spam, not on every message but say a relay has never received an event from you before (new user), it could require your first 3 messages be PoW. Then it allows you to dial it back if you did...
kennytaylor · 182w
I love the PoW concept. Relays could use a PoW threshold for spam deterrence.
Lurking Cat · 182w
This is for certain cases like if relays want to request some user to do PoW because of users suspicious behavior (indicated to spam)? By default it is not PoW, right? I remember #[3] request this to #[2]
ravi · 182w
Will it assist in anything or just cause inconvenience?
Brรผdigga · 182w
How would this influence ux for older smartphones?
techonsapevole โšก · 182w
Wow, pow could be a way to avoid mass spamming.. Like in NANO ๐Ÿ˜„ #[0]
NEW REPUBLIC OF CHINA · 182w
36ๆฐชใ€้’›ๅช’ไฝ“้ƒฝๆ˜ฏไธญๅ…ฑ็š„ๅ–‰่ˆŒ๏ผŒ็ถ“ๅธธๅ ฑๅฐŽไธญๅ…ฑ้‚ช้ปจ็š„ๆ–ฐ่ž๏ผŒๅคงๅฎถไธ€่ตท่ˆ‰ๅ ฑๅฑ่”ฝ้€™ไบ›ไธญๅ…ฑ้‚ช้ปจ็š„ๅ–‰่ˆŒ๏ผ
Perlover · 182w
This is nonsense. This won't solve anything until the relays themselves demand PoW from everyone. But even if it is - phones will do PoW, and spammers will do PoW on servers and they will still shit everything with spam.
Raptor · 182w
I am not so sure in it, I think that in this case, all Nostr clients should accept this. Something like hashcash. Otherwise Amethyst can lose a lot of users, since it would load your phone. And it would be still possible to spam, since spammers can use other clients. Btw, thanks for Amethyst. I co...