rich1.0Yaacov Akiba Slama [ARCHIVE] (npub1z0…at6uz)https://yabu.me/npub1z07sgdx84scq77jx3fddj3jt0w2w3vpa0t5gyk0nmcaggs3gyt7s6at6uznjumphttps://yabu.me📅 Original date posted:2019-11-07 📝 Original message: On 07/11/2019 16:43, Joost Jager wrote: > On Thu, Nov 7, 2019 at 3:36 PM lisa neigut <niftynei at gmail.com > <mailto:niftynei at gmail.com>> wrote: > > > Imagine the following setup: a network of nodes that trust each > other > > The goal of this pre-payment proposal is to remove the need for > trusted parties > > > Trust isn't the right word. It is a level of service that you provide > to your peers. If nodes are cognizant of the fact that the level of > service they receive goes down if they forward spam, they will be > careful on the incoming side. Require peers to build up a reputation > before increasing the inbound limits that apply to the channels with them. We can learn from the current situation in emails, that a system based on reputation tends to concentrate the power in the hands of few big and strong actors (gmail and co). If we have from the beginning a mechanism to fight against spam by paying to send message, we can perhaps have a really distributed system which cannot be censured.