what? I'm not sure what you're talking about, nor where this "expectation of safety" came from. how did she get to nostr? a person's onboarding pathway is going to strongly inform their initial experience (just like with everything else in life both digitally and analog). I'm thinking maybe you have a fallacy in your head that "perfect safety and global trust" is a possibility...? All trust is subjective. As is the definition of "safety", for that matter... "safe" for me might mean I can say whatever I want if necessary, while "safe" for a parent means their kid only see particular video content producers. There are many instance of rigidity that you have to shake out if this is going to clarify

Replies (4)

notstr's avatar
notstr 1 month ago
WoT requires a history, a back story. It doesn't just work. A cryptographic proof just works first try, during an onboarding with no prior history. If she is knew and agents are attacking that 1% she has a problem.
still incorrect, friend. a single, low trust node in your WoT could have 10,000 bots "attacking it", and it won't matter to you as long as you strongl trust a few honest actors. (this is why i said grandma needs to bootstrap via her family). the closer, stronger trust hops completely negate the more distant/lower trust hops even in the case of massive bot activity. @david has written extensively about this
notstr's avatar
notstr 1 month ago
OK. Now do two users using antisocial mechanisms. Say they want to meet up as alts.
notstr's avatar
notstr 1 month ago
Are you familiar with MEV? This is basically what we are talking about.