It’s not just about zapping, although that helps.
I don’t think we’ve ever had the opportunity to experience social media in today’s world without an artificial, highly toxic algorithm, until now.
Remove the algorithm and the advertiser’s incentives that drive that toxicity, and I’m hopeful/optimistic that it will leave way more room for goodness.
That's the thing, though. The incentives for toxic content are still present. The reason that's what emerged on other platforms, is that people respond to it. My concern is that zaps will start accruing to the same toxic echo chamber content once we have a broader sample of people on here.
There may be a broad array of views present on nostr currently, but we're generally united by a very fringe commitment to this magic internet money. That creates an atmosphere of good faith amongst us, for now.
Here’s the way I’m looking at it:
Ad-supported social media companies (ie all legacy social media) make money by showing ads. They control what you see, using algorithms, to make you more likely to keep scrolling and clicking etc.
Toxic posts are most effective at this, so those posts are boosted by the algorithm and the toxic content creators get rewarded for it.
With value for value zaps, content creators can be rewarded for posting better stuff, and without a centralized entity depending on ad revenue, there’s less incentive to implement the toxic algorithms.
I think the assumption that people will natural gravitate toward a toxic echo chamber is wrong — it’s only been that way as a result of the incentive structures, not human nature
