rns.recipes

See LXMF (first 8 letters) of this identity to see what I mean. It's identical to the stamp value of 32 iirc and it's unreasonable to see this achieved on any phone or generic pc even. But I have an ability/knowledge to do this for free or without actual hardware - other people might be able as well (And once I do it I'm free to use this identity for as long as I want while I could also make more in the background.) I just don't see how it's useful

AhyrCo wrote:

See LXMF (first 8 letters) of this identity to see what I mean. It's identical to the stamp value of 32 iirc and it's unreasonable to see this achieved on any phone or generic pc even. But I have an ability/knowledge to do this for free or without actual hardware - other people might be able as well (And once I do it I'm free to use this identity for as long as I want while I could also make more in the background.) I just don't see how it's useful

rip it doesn't show the LXMF address. It's meant to be "c0ffeeee6fd4d0431f2f64feedce0dc7"

Ahyrax wrote:

You just put access to Reticulum behind a paywall which is something it was specifically made to avoid.

You are mistaken. Having your phone or laptop CPU run 100% for 30 seconds is not a paywall. Proof-of-Work is a well established security practice. The 10c example was just putting it into perspective.

You can use the network without the stamp value, but you will not get access to my resources unless you show me you put in the effort creating that identity

metrafonic wrote:

You are mistaken. Having your phone or laptop CPU run 100% for 30 seconds is not a paywall. Proof-of-Work is a well established security practice. The 10c example was just putting it into perspective.

You can use the network without the stamp value, but you will not get access to my resources unless you show me you put in the effort creating that identity

That's fair, I agree with that and I see that it could be useful. My previous comments were related specifically to random identities calling everyone. Regarding this exact situation my belief is that it's overall not going to be very effective when applied to old/weak devices, but I guess we'll see what Mark figures out

Cross-signed identities may be relevant:
9ce92808be498e9e05590ff27cbfdfe4:/page/forum/thread.mu`cat=general|thread=how-to-handle-compromised-identities|anchor=post-3 (How to handle compromised identities)

I can't say I completely understand it yet (or ever will) but, unless I'm mistaken, it enables a chain of trust where your "root" identity could have a much higher stamp value than your "node" identities.

Mark wrote:

Stamps, in their current form are not as useful for LXST as they are for LXMF, which is why I didn't add them to LXST initially. In general, when you want to do a call, you want it to go through more or less instantly, so computing a new stamp on every call is not the best solution.

When reading the "ZEN of Reticulum", I get the imagination that one fundamental philosophy of Reticulum and everything based on it is that messages reach the recipient eventually, and one should step away from expectations of instantaneous reachability. For Reticulum-based LXST this would mean "hey, your call will arrive eventually, relax and do not expect instant connection". So in my understanding, having to wait until a call is established would fit very well the philosophy, and some extra wait for stamp calculation might not be noticeable so much if you would have to wait anyway due to how the network is working.

(In IP networks I am also sometimes used to 60..120s round trip times, by the way.)

https://lantian.pub/en/article/fun/ai-agent-bankrupted-their-operator-scan-dn42lantian.lantian/
it may be related to this