The promise of Nostr is we are not jerks cancelling others.
He created something, you are just yelling at the cloud. Mute the bot if you don't like it and carry on.
Discussion
Oh the promise of nostr is "be nice"
Oh and him creating something that polices what "facts" are is nice in your mind?
The bot does not police anything at all.
It is just a tool that can be useful to those who choose to use it.
Just mute it.
No take it down. You are not an authority on facts. Neither is your bot. You deserve to be made an example of and people should take every opportunity to let you know what an evil person you are.
I will not be taking any advice from you about what I should do with my time or energy. You are my enemy.
It's written on the bot descrition..
I do not care. Take the bot down and leave. You are an evil person with evil intentions. Take the bot down and go look in the mirror. You deserve to be made example of for attempting to police "the truth" and "facts"
You are a bad person.
Take the bot down.
Free speech does not mean "be nice". "Free speech" includes a lot of shit. But nobody (will stress it again - NOBODY) can force you to listen that shit. Learn your nostr client "how to mute/block some npub" - this is the solution in "free speech world".
Yeah I'm not going to do that. What I will do in this free speech world is make fun of and berate @jdm until I don't feel like it anymore.
What is the difference between "hey, platform, you need to block XXX somehow, because I do not want to see his comments" and "I have right to write comments about XXX and - of course - you cannot block me due to free of speech"?
I was under the impression that nostr wasn't a "platform." But rather a protocol? So your premise is wrong from the jump.
I'm arguing that PEOPLE must reject him and what he's doing. It's not about censoring him it's about rejecting him and his goals conceptually.
Does any man or machine have the ability to determine what the truth is?
So why should anyone be on board with someone claiming that they not only can but it is their duty to do so?
There is a distinct difference between what he is doing and someone going around posting even the most offensive or unpopular opinions.
I'm saying that there should be so many individuals rejecting him and the bot conceptually that he should logically come to the conclusion that taking the bot down is the right thing to do.
Because this isn't a platform the only way to do that is through consensus.
If you invite a hundred people to a party at your house and one person comes to the party and starts peeing on everything are you not going to make every effort you can to remove them or change their behavior? Is that censorship? "Oh well it's not words...." "oh well the peeing person is claiming that it's their way of expressing themselves artistically..." so is it censorship?
What he is doing is malicious and disruptive. It doesn't matter if you or he doesn't see it that way. That is the way it is. "Oh well just mute him and the bot and it goes away" no it doesn't. It still exists. He is still pissing on everything. It's just that I'm now blind to it. How does that fix the problem at its source? It doesn't.
His mentality regardless of how much he tries to disguise it with warnings or caveats is evil and should be rejected by everyone. It should be beaten out of him as acceptable behavior. And because of the nature of the protocol it would take individuals rejecting him and his methods.
- Nostr is a protocole, not a platforme, that true.
- What you are doing is not just giving your opinion about my bot, but exerting pressure and psychological harassment. You have indicated that you wish to continue this pressure until I remove my bot. This is therefore clearly an attempt at censorship. If a journalist receives the same pressure, for example from a government, it is also an attempt at censorship.
- No machine have the ability to determine what the truth is, that true.
That's what it says at the end of each of the bot's messages, as well as on its profile. Humans also do not have the ability to define truth with certainty, but that does not prevent us from giving our opinion. At least my bot is transparent on this point and always indicate the sources from which the information comes.
You can simply think of my bot as an aggregator and summarizer of popular sources on the internet.
You can get exactly the same result by asking ChatGPT to verify a piece of information. It will respond with even less humility than my bot, without even indicating that it could be wrong. Should we wish for the destruction of ChatGPT?
- If someone at my party harasses me violently like you do, I won't accept it either.
If someone bothers me, I kick him out of the party so I don't have to see him anymore. I don't need to “stop his existence,” because maybe other people like him and I don't have the authority to judge that.
Sorry for the somewhat clumsy metaphor, but it's not mine.
- I can totally understand that some people don't like Factchecker's answers.
Here is my solution for coexistence between people who want to use my bot and those who don't like it : Those who don't want to see it, or who find it immoral or stupid, mute it. What is the problem with this solution?
Why should we absolutely prevent people who want to use it from doing so?
Especially since the result will be pretty much the same as if you copied a text and asked ChatGPT to check the facts. I think you're overestimating my bot a little; it's just a faster way than doing Google searches yourself to check information.
Even if only two people on Nostr want to use FactChecker and everyone else mutes it, they have the right to do so.
- I'm not going to give up & FactChecker is unstoppable
It's a matter of principle. I will stop running FactChecker when I decide to do so.
Like Nostr, the bot is not a platform, but open source code that my grandmother could set up. If the bot is ever taken out of service, anyone who wants to use it will be able to get it up and running again. https://github.com/judemont/Nostr-FactChecker .
It's maybe a little pretentious to say that when my bot is so basic, but, ideas are bulletproof.
- Like the bot, I don't claim to have the absolute truth; I know that no one does. That's why I fully accept criticism and welcome debate. But insults and verbal abuse have no place here (I mute them).
I wrote this message with Deepl because I don't speak English that well, so it's easier.
What you're doing is exerting pressure on individuals under the guise of "fact checking." You can see it even within how you liked your own post and you had your bot like the post too. You're being manipulative even right here and right now. You not only deserve to be harassed it's actually the decent thing to do. An individual pressuring someone into behaving decently amongst a group is t censorship. This is a manipulation of reality. What you're doing is gaslighting.
Ok that's not far enough. The bot must come down.
I can think of you as a raped faggot that the world would be better without. And I can think of your bot as a way of you attempting to exert your will onto others. A raped faggot will.
Ok you *can* get the same results willingly from ChatGPT. What you and others (very few others I might add) are doing is FORCING your faggot bot to respond to people in an attempt to police them. You know it and I know it. There's no sense in refuting it.
If you went to a party and started pissing all over everything you'd be lucky to leave standing up. You're only able to pull off your awful behavior because this is the internet and people can't physically harm you. The correct and decent thing to do is to harass you into giving up. Which is my aim and I will succeed.
Oh the guy who is creating problems is now offering solutions? How Hegelian of you!!!! I will be taking NO compromises from you. You will take the bot down.
The problem again with your proposed solution is that you are still pissing all over everything at the party. Telling people to close their eyes because they don't like it isn't a solution. It's a raped faggot causing a problem and then telling people to ignore the problem. You are the problem.
"We" does not include you. You created a problem and you should be harassed into removing the problem you created. "Why should we prevent people from pissing on everything at our nice dinner party" I don't know dipshit what ever could be one single reason anyone would want that?
People can copy and paste into ChatGPT then. How is that not a compromise? Oh wait cause it misses the part where you have power. Oh look at that your real motive has exposed itself.
Again you're saying your proposed "compromise" is a farce.
You will take the bot down. It's a matter of time.
Yup it's a matter of principle and I will harass you and berate you until you bend to my will. You deserve it.
Yup and I'll harass anyone that decides to run your bot after you take this down. And I'll continue to harass you until you take the GitHub down because you're promoting this. You deserve it.
You're a faggot and your ideas are diseased and your mind is a cesspool. You're an evil person that deserves to have horrible things happen to him. In the past you would've been tarred and feathered or put in a stockade. You would've been bested to a pulp and your family would've been on the side of the people doing the beating.
The world would be a better place without you. Your father should be ashamed that you came from his loins. You're a rat dressed in human skin.
Ok let summarize your note a bit:
> I'm a manipulative gaslighter. Wow that's a heavy accusation, fortunately you have great evidence....... Oh.. I like my own notes.... Wow ok mybad. You know what ? Now I will even ZAP my own notes.
> Insults and psychological violence
> You are in denial of the fact that it's possible to mute someone. You prefer to believe that you are FORCED to see the bote's notes.
> This compromise is basically the philosophy of Nostr.
> Using the pronoun ‘we’ as if it were a large majority, when you are almost the only one asking for this.
> I will apparently seek power, when literally anyone can launch their own version of the bot if they wish.
> Similar discourse to that of bank executives who want to destroy bitcoin at all costs.
> Insults and psychological violence
I'm not reading any of this and I'll continue to harass you until you take your faggot ass bot down.