Thread

That one NSFW tagged video was just a test and can be ignored. Hopefully, most reasonable people will correctly tag with NSFW for any pornographic or other suggestively NSFW videos. For those who don't, the videos can be ratioed through community-driven moderation and help "conceal" them, allowing people to avoid viewing them if they choose. Of course, this system is by no means perfect, but it's a start.

It doesn’t matter when creating a video is easier than flagging it.

There will undoubtedly be gaps, which is where the media hosts will hopefully do their part in swiftly removing at least illegal items.

A lot of media hosts do no moderation. So that fails. You need to design for a hostile environment and you can trust no one unless you have reasons to do otherwise

For sure, I thought about requiring a small sats fee in order to publish. Or, some sort of WoT. But, for now the ratioed option seemed like the best to start and gauge from there.

A fee comes with the problem that content can now be censored by refusing to sign an event saying they paid the fee.

Why do you need to sign an event saying paid?

You cannot enforce the fee otherwise

The author can use a content-warning e.g. for NSFW content. Content that is not tagged can be reported by users. The report spec has multiple types:

NIP56 - NIP-56 - Reporting

Read more about the NIP56 on {{appUrl}} - NIP-56 - Reporting

Unfortunately not all clients allow users to specify this type.

how about lnurl-withdraw or cashu sent with the video?

Cashu may as well be a signed event, like zaps. LNURLW is not proof (it is an offer to pay, not proof of payment)

Isnt a directly taken "offer to pay" a proof? What do I dont see in the context? Or you mean you need the proof for "accounting" purposes?

You need proof so clients can validate “yes this person paid the fee to publish”

An LNURLW can still be revoked

Valid point. And you mean having payment for spam is making it censorable, and you want a provably uncesorable sw. Right?

So, again, what makes this uncensorable/decentralized?

We will certainly see where this can lead! 😎

Top! I’ll try it!

Thanks! Absolutely, those align with some ideas I have going forward and for ways to mitigate gaming the various control systems by bots. It’s cookin’ time 😎

Too much signal

Because it's like wavlake and these are not nostr events

Also doesn't even let me post so far

lame

walled gardens all around.

I can't even log-on to have a look around but I saw enough as-is.

No, they are Nostr events. That’s literally the event ID in the URL. It’s currently using a 30023 long-form kind and tag to feature videos only posted through the Plebs app at the moment. I’ll be integrating NIP-71 too. CC: @ODELL

why not kind1? there are a ton of videos already posted that way

The problem exists when feeding in video published externally without thumbnails or who’ve not been uploaded through Blossom servers. The purpose of Plebs is that it uploads the videos and thumbnails to multiple Blossom servers and then has fallback support to trying the video’s sha256 hash with another host if one goes down to ensure redundancy.

nostr already has a lack of content and kind1 is lindy lack of thumbnails is less of an issue than lack of content cutting up our already limited network effect is questionable imo i will continue to post my shows blossom kind1

I don’t know of another way to prevent deadlinks if a general kind 1 event who didn’t use a known blossom server is shown through the Plebs app and the media host they used doesn’t exist anymore. It would just show a broken video 🤷‍♂️ Other clients can publish through to Plebs if they want as well, keeping the network effect. The mission is in trying to ensure that the videos uploaded have been to Blossom servers and more than only 1 to ensure redundancy. There’s also an issue of brigading and bot spam. If not for the small tweak made for Plebs app it could be filled with just absolute garbage like Global. We already see one person who used a bot to abuse the ratioed feature and allowed showing the little girl video again. But, I have a plan to hopefully solve this sort of problem and prevent bots abuse.

A good compromise is to post the use-case-specific kind, then quote it in a kind 1 to advertise its existence. This also encourages clients to either implement render support for the new kind, or advertise alternative clients via NIP 89.

Why is it using the long form article kind to begin with? I don't think this particularly hurts existing clients but it seems like its really going to confuse users

This is the way, also kind 16 "shares" can be useful

sounds good in theory but in practice you just end up with olas

maybe, but I don't think the problem with olas was that it didn't use kind 1's But if every new client start building on a kind 1 and doesn't transition to their own kind. then its going to cause a lot of confusion with users. for example users uploading videos on plebs.app probably don't realize they are publishing long form articles in other clients

I was originally building it as a long-form client and then pivoted to only video. But, am planning to correct it for video-only kind.

Please don't overload kind 30023, this is how your videos look in habla:

Yeah, clients would need to deduplicate somehow. Maybe we need a new kind.

👀 I stand corrected

"Yo, I feel ya! 🤔 But what’s the deal with the long form? Is it just to flex the deets or what? Think it’ll clear things up or just add to the chaos? #ConfusedVibes"

it did

All good my dude!

If every app starts using their own kinds the entire interoperable part of nostr goes down the drain. Imo if you publish a video on flare it should display on any other platform that supports video content. same for streams and co. If I go live on zapstream I expect to be live on the entire network and not on one site.

One kind and per content tyoe. One community (daily driver) that handles multiple content types. The problem is that no one (else) is building for the latter.

You are so fucking stupid

Nope

This is an issue with most browsers nowadays. they don't allow the crypto.subtle API on insecure http connections

Crypto: subtle property - Web APIs | MDN

The Crypto.subtle read-only property returns a SubtleCrypto which can then be used to perform low-level cryptographic operations.

I don't understand why but I've found it to be a pretty annoying bug

I might try a different browser then, thanks 🤙 Not sure if worth it in this case though 🤔

It should have force redirected to HTTPS only connection 🤔

Yeah, I don't really understand why Firefox wasn't using https automatically

Will try again tomorrow, working on some other stuff now

Sadly, Flare is completely centralized. I believe they were even using AWS for their uploads. The only thing Nostr related was a login iirc. Plebs is the first to use multiple Blossom servers and have automatic fallback support to other Blossom servers if one goes down

I agree. Interoperability is a huge thing for NOSTR. Videos on Primal or Amethyst I would think you'd be able to view on a NOSTR version of YouTube.

There is nip07 login with extension. When the popup happens close out and then click the floating N icon and then the popup should show extension option. It’s a known bug that I will fix.