Haha, it feels a little bit like this classic xkcd: https://xkcd.com/927/
I think it's not a task of a NIP to define how we're going to use existing trust attestations, explicit (38000) or implicit ("827919") or proxy (zaps+likes). This is a field where "read" algorithms will compete. Maybe a NIP could be used to define the inputs or outputs for such algorithms, but it was not my intention with NIP-77.
I would be fine if app developers in the future chose this uniform format to express trust. I also think it's useful to have a query that returns a recursive trust graph, and algorithms can do anything on this data, possibly including other data sources. The goal is to avoid the xkcd situation as much as humanly possible.
And thanks for mentioning couchsurfing! https://www.trustroots.org wants to bring his community + reputation system to nostr, I'll contact him!
Lez
npub1el…2cume
2024-04-05 16:31:59
in reply to nevent1q…76dg
Author Public Key
npub1elta7cneng3w8p9y4dw633qzdjr4kyvaparuyuttyrx6e8xp7xnq32cumePublished at
2024-04-05 16:31:59Event JSON
{
"id": "b8a2d89d15685c829654b9b9c124da6ec3222a96b754611df534f2ab7e38bf8a",
"pubkey": "cfd7df62799a22e384a4ab5da8c4026c875b119d0f47c2716b20cdac9cc1f1a6",
"created_at": 1712334719,
"kind": 1,
"tags": [
[
"e",
"de8a97bc622006877c7881a9a69867a794395430fe8401bf0103992f9e3b4907",
"",
"root"
],
[
"e",
"2d886941c7446d9854846be475d3afa91dc1f991498f821b8ed88d0a2940a5fb",
"",
"reply"
],
[
"p",
"e5272de914bd301755c439b88e6959a43c9d2664831f093c51e9c799a16a102f",
"",
"mention"
],
[
"p",
"97c70a44366a6535c145b333f973ea86dfdc2d7a99da618c40c64705ad98e322"
],
[
"p",
"df67f9a7e41125745cbe7acfbdcd03691780c643df7bad70f5d2108f2d4fc200"
],
[
"p",
"cd868bf553cabfeef5ff89f9d34875210cdeda276ca4c6a3e7ffb7a31ab96447"
],
[
"p",
"e5272de914bd301755c439b88e6959a43c9d2664831f093c51e9c799a16a102f"
],
[
"p",
"cfd7df62799a22e384a4ab5da8c4026c875b119d0f47c2716b20cdac9cc1f1a6"
],
[
"p",
"460c25e682fda7832b52d1f22d3d22b3176d972f60dcdc3212ed8c92ef85065c"
],
[
"p",
"633f317e99bc5a55c85d842784989a2bcdc31bea3c4c01fdfc80fd340facca3a"
],
[
"p",
"726a1e261cc6474674e8285e3951b3bb139be9a773d1acf49dc868db861a1c11"
]
],
"content": "Haha, it feels a little bit like this classic xkcd: https://xkcd.com/927/\n\nI think it's not a task of a NIP to define how we're going to use existing trust attestations, explicit (38000) or implicit (\"827919\") or proxy (zaps+likes). This is a field where \"read\" algorithms will compete. Maybe a NIP could be used to define the inputs or outputs for such algorithms, but it was not my intention with NIP-77.\n\nI would be fine if app developers in the future chose this uniform format to express trust. I also think it's useful to have a query that returns a recursive trust graph, and algorithms can do anything on this data, possibly including other data sources. The goal is to avoid the xkcd situation as much as humanly possible.\n\nAnd thanks for mentioning couchsurfing! https://www.trustroots.org wants to bring his community + reputation system to nostr, I'll contact him! ",
"sig": "8a38a9c7d9631af20788cb5c4d9bd5ed72edb8f47f03d7f73574f8c99268c1533da81d9eaa06582fb57aa098a78b8242f991365b966af65d0eb4e55507af2dd0"
}