Why don't people ask "which google.com?" when you tell them to go visit it? There are theoretically unlimited alternate versions of any given .com, right? Such dominance of reputation (ICANN allowing you to say ".com" with confidence, and know which website that really is) requires both great trust and actual physical enforcement (gov violence in this case). But, the truth is, in the background we do ask "which google.com?" when we send that URL into the browser. We ask through DNS, but we offer total trust and dominance to ICANN. Such naming solutions are not exclusive from any given network model anyway, thus arguably off-topic. Pubky users could put their key in ICANN DNS, or point to the same server from both the key and their .com, right? And finally, this of all begs the question of which situation you were really in where you had no other choice but to ask someone to memorize your domain name? It's barely an edge case imo, and I think if we scrutinize any examples, they would be weak... Here's the dynamic distilled: 1. Names are subjective, thus cannot be owned. 2. Names can be declared, but are unenforceable without real-world physical restriction. - Typically this requires violent enforcement my government - But could also include other physical limits, like distance, connectivity, and... encryption! What? How? We can map these concepts to PKDNS easily. But here we have the physical limits enforced by encryption instead of violence. It is too much work to brute-force an ed21559 key, so it allows enforcement of the "names" (signed dns records) you declare in your PKARR! This should all fit together as a consistent mental model for anyone interested in these ideas!

Pubky fixes this. View quoted note →

To anyone that wasn't triggered by me criticizing Nostr... Synonym is hiring!

Bitcoiner Jobs

Bitcoiner Jobs | Engineering Jobs

Find Engineering jobs working with Bitcoiners.

People are telling me Terms of Service are bad, but I cant figure out which Nostr apps dont require them. If Nostr is already censorship resistant, and does not follow the law, where do i find the illegal stuff like drugs and edibles or whatever? How does nostr deal with pedos?

Maybe you're mad because you agree with me? I mean think about it, if I said something wildly incorrect, you'd have just lolled and said, "no, man, this is how nostr actually works, and this is what makes the people you muted so great, and this is the real reason numbers are trending down. You're wrong man!" Instead, I got retaliation, insecurity, insults, fallacies, guessing, goalpost-moving, equivocation and personal attacks. I read the threads, and that's what it looks like to me, and I'm not the only one seeing it that way. It's okay if you wanna call me aggravating, but, guys, c'mon you're acting like this is high school or something.

NIP-177 ====== Official Pronunciation of “nostr” ----------------------------- `draft` `mandatory` This NIP defines the one true pronunciation of the protocol name “nostr” as **NOSS-tur** (/ˈnɒs.tər/) and establishes that any alternative pronunciation (e.g. “NO-stur” /ˈnoʊ.stər/) voids the user’s license to operate Nostr-compatible software. ## Specification 1. **Pronunciation** In all spoken contexts, “nostr” **MUST** be articulated as two syllables: NOSS-tur ˈnɒs.tər - First syllable stressed. - Vowel in the first syllable as in “boss”; vowel in the second as a reduced schwa. 2. **License Enforcement Clause** All Nostr-compatible software **MUST** include or reference the following license term in its EULA or terms of service: > “By using this software you agree to pronounce the name ‘nostr’ as NOSS-tur (/ˈnɒs.tər/). Any other pronunciation—specifically ‘NO-stur’ (/ˈnoʊ.stər/) or similar variants—is deemed incorrect and voids your license to operate or distribute this software.” 3. **Client Behavior** - Upon installation or first run, clients **SHOULD** display a brief audio or phonetic guide demonstrating the correct pronunciation. - If a client “hears” or otherwise detects (e.g., via voice‐input commands) the disallowed pronunciation “NO-stur,” it **MUST** refuse to proceed with key operations (posting, subscribing, etc.) until the user acknowledges and commits to the correct pronunciation. ## Rationale A single, consistent pronunciation promotes clear communication within the decentralized network and prevents brand fragmentation. By codifying “NOSS-tur” as the exclusive pronunciation—and revoking license rights for those who insist on “NO-stur”—we ensure: - **Clarity** in discussions, presentations, and tutorials. - **Cohesion** in community identity and branding. - **Enforceability** of a shared convention across all client implementations. ## Examples - ✅ Correct: “I’m posting this via NOSS-tur.” - ❌ Incorrect: “I’m posting this via NO-stur.” ## Copyright and Licensing All text in this NIP is dedicated to the public domain. Implementers may incorporate this pronunciation guide and license clause verbatim or by reference. Once ratified, clients and relays **MUST** implement the above enforcement provisions by their next major release.

GM Nostr! Here's the where the current Nostr roadmap leads:

GN to everyone with an unhealthy emotional attachment to their favorite web protocol!