@ᴛʜᴇ ᴅᴇᴀᴛʜ ᴏꜰ ᴍʟᴇᴋᴜ is a smart cookie, and has a nice proposal. But (like Rustr’s proposal also) this problem is not going to be solved by only ONE technique for key management / rotation / expiration / ect … there will be many. There MUST be many. Nostr’s existential challenge is NOT to find consensus around single NIP for any one problem … but to allow for dynamism (having a variety of techniques in use simultaneously) WITHOUT overly burdening users or developers in the process. This is where WoT comes in. Most solutions (for any problem) will lean on WoT (in some manner) as a proxy for truth. Without assuming any one WoT technique will be “the WoT NIP”, ANY WoT should be able to “truthfully” demonstrate that “this is indeed Alice’s new npub”.
ManiMe's avatar ManiMe
By leaning into WoT, NIP consensus will not be needed … but also … lack of consensus might just break Nostr.
View quoted note →

Replies (1)

🎯 We need to follow Einstein’s Dictum: we should purse the simplest solution to the problem, nothing simpler. I think Decentralized Lists offers a method to start out with the simplest workable solution, but then to layer complexity on top of it. The idea is that we achieve consensus one tiny bite at a time, building up gradually to a sophisticated solution, rather than try to generate consensus over a cathedral all at once. When a proposed solution tries to do too much all at once, it’s the complexity that prevents consensus from being achieved, the result being that nothing happens.