Thanks. I'm not trying to be coy or anything.

Just we see some naive tooling popping up that measures mostro activity per coordinator, but just like in the early days when coinmarketcap was launched and some exchanges were inflating their trade volume, you can do that on nostr too. Everyone will be more likely to believe you because "it's decentralized", and "the proof is in the signatures" and therefore it is true. But you don't need a super intelligent LLM to see how this can be gamed (after all, these didn't exist back in the day either) and there's a risk here.

So, "reputation" can be faked - it can even be automated. And I frankly have no idea how to fix this due to the sybil nature of nostr. Every trade is a risk, because reputation is a risk, so you want as little as possible data trail to your trades from a privacy perspective, but at the same time a maximum data trail to your trades from a reputation perspective. This goes for coordinators as for makers as for takers. It's a mess because the incentives are poorly aligned. Even if the mostro network were big enough to do pgp-style WoT, where I would add trust to your key and follow your key's reviews and pray that your key didn't get exposed, it still means that you should reuse an identity key for me to be able to follow it, even while your identity should not be mixed with your transactions (that goes against the pseudonymity principle, no matter what some prominent nostr devs got told by Claude to be totes ok)

Bottom line, FATF was smart: control the on- and offramps, control much of Bitcoin. The only thing that could have solved it was localbitcoins, before they went into compliance mode and iirc eventually gave up because it became impossible for them to operate compliantly. The only real defense we have today is to not use fiat at all.