Good points. I think you're touching on something fundamental, and that is that on Nostr you have to accept that all accounts are throwaway. And act accordingly.

The architecture mandates this. Call it architecture-mandated psychology if you want a fancy phrase. Anyway FROST isn't a solution, it just highlights the problem from another direction.

Sadly, conventional micro-blogging is a bad use case for a world in which all accounts are throwaway. Conventional long-form blogging even worse.

So the biggest problem isn't the architecture. It's the current leading use case.

Sort and filter for reads within feed categories: most recent, most commented, etc. Also seems a bug with all reads showing as 0 minute reads.

Context: I've setup a different mix of popular relays on each to try and simulate the experience of a group of users. But also each client does filtering too, so that adds another "can't be sure" layer.

You could make a partial relay, but then anyone subscribed to that relay would only know about the posts, likes replies from other people also subscribed to it. But the post would still be out in the wild and able to be commented on by strangers, so there would be lots of missed reactions.

Bluesky's thinking is a lot of people would really hate it not knowing how many likes their post got, or if there are replies that they are not seeing. And posts can get a lot of replies and likes from strangers, and from there good conversations can start. The only way to ensure everyone sees 100% of the likes and replies on a post is if there is a single relay. I kind of agree. For example your reply is not showing up on clients Primal or Iris, but it is showing on Snort and Nostrudel. I would never have seen your reply if I didn't come to Snort to check out this same post after seeing it on Primal. That is very annoying, on Nostr I always suspect I'm missing interesting replies.

NFC cards, rings, etc., are pretty insecure though, all things considered.

He left out to live my life as if there is a god and die to find out that, yes, in fact there is—but it's a different one and it's not pleased.

Ah yeah, a bit mushy worded. I mean I could react to your note (repost, quote-post, straight-up reply) for the purpose of starting a conversation with my own gang about it, not wanting you to be notified. On X that doesn't work, since any user can see which posts of theirs have recently been reposted or quote posted by who, and of course everyone's notified of replies. I'd have to screenshot your post and then tag my gang in the post with the screenshot. On nostr, however, I can loop in my gang without having to screenshot, so they have the benefit of the original post and full context. To do that, when reacting I just use the relay or set of relays my gang/community uses, and which I know you're not subscribed to since these are niche relays just for us. (In both cases I accept that it's all public behind the scenes and you might find out somehow or other, but that's fine, as long as you're not notified in the normal way.). In other words I want to fork your post on purpose, not by accident. Call it awareness-forking. If my client sees me doing that and thinks "I better divulge those niche relays so the poster will know about them", and then they're declared in the signed event, and then you see that notification and jump in to our gang chat to ask why we're being so rude, then I'm not going to be happy about that, and I go back to screenshotting, which is a bummer, because this awareness-forking seemed like a cool nostr feature that legacy social media doesn't have. This all can be solved via client outbox settings, like the ability to mark certain relays as do not divulge, etc. For what it's worth I see this ability to fork posts as something with a lot of utility. It's cool that posts can go in different directions. (The goal of outbox is of course to prevent awareness forking by keeping the original poster aware.) But if it's agreed this is a feature and not a bug then it means clients need to get even smarter, and that's a struggle.

Can't force clients to respect outbox, and if even if all clients did some users might not want to be forced by their client to publish (and reveal their IP address) to unknown relays and demand to be given a choice. Other thing is there are two types of missed replies, Type A is replies that the replying party does not want the poster to be aware of (think screenshots of X posts with chatter underneath). Type B is posts that the replying party assumes/hopes the poster is aware of but actually the poster isn't aware and never will be. On nostr many users want "Type A Native" (no screenshotting, referencing the actual live post), and that complicates things, since you need a way for users to opt for Type A Native which isn't misunderstood by the client to be Type B.

Or maybe the article was ... suspenseful music ... edited.

Well yeah, but on the other hand nostr's current censorship resistance, in my opinion, is due in very large part to it being off the radar, small—and not the architecture. I get the whack-a-mole argument, but I feel people are greatly exaggerating the difficulty of playing whack-a-mole in this day and age. Any government, sufficiently motivated and resourced, could make it the protocol so painful to make practical use of that, while it would still hobble along for the die-hards, the nostr vision as it stands now would be dead. (In other words it'd be a heck of a lot easier to cripple nostr than people are assuming.) Rather than censorship resistance I see the real value of nostr being in portability, though for very specific use cases that are not affected by nostr's limitations.