pull down to refresh
21 sats \ 2 replies \ @Fiatrevelation 27 Dec \ parent \ on: Elon the 'free speech absolutist' strikes again Politics_And_Law
So is it the decentralized aspect, the pub/private key and data sovereignty, or the bitcoin aspect?
To me information networks themselves seem inherently centralizing, which I think is a symptom of "network effects."
A real decentralized platform is always preferable. A federation of centralized platforms is a compromise. The problem are closed centralized platforms.
To me the main point is moderation, abuse of power, algorithmic feeds etc. If there are pub/private keys or any of the other stuff you mentioned is only secondary to me. Feel free to disagree.
reply
The problem are closed centralized platforms.
I agree
To me the main point is moderation, abuse of power, algorithmic feeds
Nostr relays are moderated, as in users can be removed/censored from them. It's still so early so we can't really tell if/how this will be abused. And nostr clients are using algorithmic feeds now. Also, the social media use case for Nostr is just one of many, and for it to compete here while being decentralized, I don't really know how it will look.
Social networks ubiquity is what attracts normies to them and a big reason they are so useful. In other words, I think people use them because they offer a maximal reach, 'anyone can be a star'. Not saying I like this, but seems true.
If there are pub/private keys or any of the other stuff you mentioned is only secondary to me.
Private and public key ownership is what makes Nostr a good protocol for maintaining decentralization, because users are free to take there data to any client/app they please. In this sense Nostr is 'open.' This is a positive.
reply