Nostr Web Client

Im ok with centralized banning of spammers on public relays. Hopefully this is the censorship we can all get behind. That and banning cp on media hosts.

I’m ok with coordinated engineering efforts to censor specific things while keeping the network censorship resistant for legitimate activity. Bitcoin is censorship resistant but still “censors” certain types of spam at the p2p layer so everyone can actually use the system for its intended purpose.

Bitcoin is even more extreme, these censorship rules (standardness rules) are centralized and decided by a few people. I’m not even suggesting that, i’m just suggesting a reputation based approach that relays can tap into or not.

Spam does not deserve the same censorship resistance properties as legitimate activity. nostr:note1czywrqx87muljstlez0r4c8075ddsukxv0pmv6wvcrfq3lfqtrnqy2r2l2

banjo 1y ago

I'm not in favor of *ANY* type of centralized censorship. Even entertaining this idea means you've not learned anything from the recent past.

I *AM* in favor of INDIVIDUALS being able to monitor their own feeds (in old school parlance "you can always change the channel if you don't like what's on the TV")--i.e. a "mute" list.

But I couldn't disagree more with *ANY* type of centralized censorship--(And franky I can't believe I'm even reading this on Nostr).

Sheeple...I don't need YOU or ANYONE to "protect" me or "keep me safe"...stop it!!

Reply to this note

Please Login to reply.

Discussion

jb55 1y ago

You don’t have to use my relay

jb55 1y ago

Also, would love you to run you own public relay without spam protections. When it starts dumping megabytes of spam into everyones threads and notifications people won’t want to use it, even with client based filtering, because its a waste of data and has additional mental burden of accidentally filtering people who are legitimate and outside your WoT.

banjo 1y ago

If you want to solve the problem, then create tools that let INDIVIDUALS censor whatever they want...maybe they can subscribe to whitelists and blacklists...

But it has to be at an INDIVIDUAL level--NOT a central level.

Maybe it's easier to code it centrally--I get that--but just because it's easier doesn't mean it's the right thing to do.

jb55 1y ago

What client do you use? Damus likely censors the least out of most of them. Who tf are you talking to?

Girino Vey! 1y ago

using a relay that blocks some kinds of events is an individual choice. Running your own relay that does not block anything is also an individual choice. It's all at the individual level, and the protocol guarantees you that.

banjo 1y ago

Yes--agree. Yet practically speaking, if Nostr is going to prosper than most will not have the knowledge (nor desire) to run their own relays.

Consequently these decisions (whether to censor, and how to do so) will ultimately determine the sucess (or failure) of the entire protocol.

Given that Nostr was created in response to censorship on other platforms, then enabling censorship on Nostr seems to put us all on that same trajectory.

We're better than that...FIND A WAY to solve the problem WITHOUT central control by some type of "authority".

Let ME choose what I would like to read...

Girino Vey! 1y ago

I'm not really sure what central authority you're talking about. There are, literally, hundreds (or even thousands) of relays. Which one is the central authority?

banjo 1y ago

Each relay operator is the "central authority", deciding what is to be seen (and not seen) by that relay's users...

Girino Vey! 1y ago

so you have thousands of independent central authorities to choose from….

banjo 1y ago

How will you know what a relay operator is "filtering"?

How will you know if information you'd like to see is not being presented to you?

How will you ensure a relay operator is not shadow banning certain accounts or topics?

How will you know if a relay operator isn't doing exactly what Twitter and Facebook have been doing?

Girino Vey! 1y ago

there are several ways, but the simplest one is: run your fucking relay!

banjo 1y ago

Said this in another reply, but are we really wanting Nostr's freedom of speech proposition to be "Hey spin up your own relay"?

We're better than that--we need to make things easier for folks to adopt Nostr...not harder.

banjo 1y ago

And I CERTAINLY will not...but your'e advocating for the exact thing that Nostr was created to prevent.

Seriously, I cannot believe that you're saying "censorship is the answer"...

That's what Twitter is for...

Or... perhaps you're saying that if YOU are to be the ultimate arbiter of what should be censored, then it's ok...

Check your ego at the door my friend...

jb55 1y ago

So its censorship resistant than, whats your point? My suggestion doesn’t make nostr any less censorship resistant, it just provides a tool for cleaning up spam on relays, noone has to use the tool. Get a grip dude

banjo 1y ago

Let me be clear--I see Nostr as the savior of online communication . We (as its stewards) need to be EXTREMELY careful to not destroy it as it grows and matures.

Conceptually (IMHO) the answer is to create blacklists / whitelists that users subscribe to--those lists can be created by node operators or by external groups--and then the INDIVIDUAL chooses to enable those lists or not.

We all do this already--most here do not look at the "global" feed--but I would NEVER say "let's just turn off global--no one reads it". But that is exactly what you're advocating for.

Free and open communication is just that--and it's MY choice to decide what I will (and will not0 listen to. And it's NOT your choice to do that for me.

R 1y ago

No one is suggesting any type of censorship for the relay you choose to run. Relay anything you want, I’ll be enjoying getting notes from relays that filter out spam.