Airpods were fine too

You need to be ✨subtle✨

2. Is not really a client issue but +1 both bridges are missing in a way or another (missing updates left and forth)

I don’t know the specifics that make IPFS slow, but I’m skeptical it’s something that could be fixed easily without some sort of hairy drawback (otherwise it would’ve been fixed upstream already).
Your proposed solution would help offload blossom servers but not propagating notes themselves.

I don’t think it’s fair to say “this is just a side channel” to deflect issues because it opens a terrible precedent, why should a dev support the “bad” transport instead of just supporting the canonical one?

Don’t get me wrong, if you look at my past notes you will know I’ve been tooting the P2P horn, the problems with tying features to specific relays etc. but I also appreciate the pragmatic approach nostr devs have taken to get something off the ground.

My point is, I think we should learn from past experiences (also see Zeronet) so we don’t repeat the same mistakes.

Regarding auto expiration of messages, I believe it should be optional (we probably should have a service that splits the costs of hosting a group between the members, whatever).

Message persistence is one of the reasons people choose Telegram over WhatsApp.

DHT is not a silver bullet.

Torrents get spam attacks, CJDNS routing tables have grown enough to require offloading the routing to dedicated nodes (this scaling problem inspired the creation of the Yggdrasil network, which our friend @FIPS shares some similarities, namely the spanning tree routing algorithm), IPFS supposedly addresses the vulnerability issues but discoverability of “unpopular” content is slower than finding whatever most of the nodes are already hosting.

Bottom line is, resiliency is hard.

Public spaces will eventually rot regardless and the real platform is the friends we make along the way?
Did I understand correctly?

I mean it’s one way of seeing it but I don’t get how it ties back to the conversation.

Speaking of out of band, this is something which also happens from time to time. Not sure if it could be handled better.

Blocklists bring back central authorities, hiding everything by default once again risk hiding legitimate requests (hey email also has this issue of putting legitimate senders randomly into the spam folder because of some spam heuristic), at least WoT somewhat alleviates this.

Considering centralization no longer shields from spam (see the comments section of any YouTube video), it’s interesting to see that, as long as you don’t touch public groups, facebook posts don’t get spam, I would say it’s because of the “only friends and friends of friends can comment”.

I don’t know if the Instagram analogy counts though, in that case it’s more of an ego booster and real connections are negotiated out of band.

Even if the influx of invites don’t take down a server, they still annoy the end user and are otherwise indistinguishable from legitimate requests.

Email is an interesting example, just like Matrix they have a DNS prefilter, access to message contents and yet they often decide to drop messages from new/unknown servers.

In principle the system you’ve described could end up needing layers, a domain name is not free yet it is cheap enough not to matter for scammers/spammers.

I also think it’s safe to say the bad guys have a bigger budget than the average user just trying to join the network.