Hot take đš
Maybe in the end fiatjaf doxxed himself due to the weak opsec đ
Discussion
He used his nym long before Nostr. Actually he came up with it while choosing name in a multiplayer videogame.
Before the article he doxxed his location(not exact, but country) publicly on internet. Also, before he created nym he used the name mentioned in article in the mailing list, he goes to the podcasts and being public, and he also works or worked at ZBD.
nostr:note1eeadl2hgycaz92c56x903rexpwj0hvl7au3vj67r4592sxd435nsyw6vgj
Wow! I couldn't even think of it. It turns out that his identity was always on the surface, but we were so respectful of him that we did not even think about finding out anything about him and it may have seemed impossible to us, because we believed that the person behind such advanced technology probably made serious efforts to hide his personal data. In fact, he was not pseudonymous all this time, it was our collective delusion. By the way, all the information from the article was leaked at the end of 2022. The journalist didnât make any effort, she just found it on Google. I think fiatjaf has surpassed Satoshi - he somehow made it so that none of us even tried to find out his personal data all this time.
While this is true, and I'm sure he knows this. He was probably surprised that his identity was not better known because it was well published. On google groups, on ripple users, in ipfs, on github, on licenses, and so on. But if he wants to be known as a psuedonym, we should call him that. We should call people what they want to be called, because it's polite. Still think what Business Insider did was really bad. Maybe nostr will actually get stronger for this, as it transitions from a one person labour of love, to a community driven open source movement.
Yeap. As I said the article is dumb but people overhype it bigger than the actual article is lmao
It was either bad opsec or he just didnt care for at least 4 years. His real name is all over the place:
https://github.com/ds300/derivablejs/issues/69#issuecomment-318461100
The article was written in a quite sinister way. But everyone knows now, and it's not a big deal. I personally want to engage with nostr a bit more now that it's less of a cult of personality.
Itâs literally never been a cult of personality.
Maybe he meant circle jerking đ
Vous savez l'an dernier il y avait une note de jack sur nostr avec une prĂ©sentation de Fiatjat et de son parcours en piĂšce sauf la partie oĂč Katherine long le liĂ© au racisme ..
il aurait dû la republier cela aurait évité les notes de ls semaine derniÚre y compris les changements spontanés de pseudos ubuesques de tant de nostriches ..
Je rappelle que c'est la 2eme fois que ce type d'actions se fait sur nostr ..lorsque l'entreprise de jack Ă©tait ciblĂ©e en Australie tout nostr Ă©tait contre Greenpeace alors que cela n'avait rien Ă voir avec Greenpeace...cette plateforme se doit d'ĂȘtre neutre si elle tient Ă survivre ...
Certains le deifient quand mĂȘme HODL
I thought it was interesting how many nostriches wanted to censor or cancel something, that they thought was morally outrageous. Yet, on nostr itself, censorship resistance seems to be valued.
In the end much of it turned out to just be pretty public data. I kind of liked it, since im no business insider fan. But it did make me wonder what nostriches really want, some kind of selective censorship resistance, perhaps. A minor philosophical point I'll think about a bit more ...
Have to fight fire with fire.
These people are not sitting around pondering philosophical points, they never stop to ask if what theyâre doing is good or moral or just, they just want power and they will use our good nature against us.
Thatâs exactly how the Overton window has shifted so far left - these people have had zero resistance.
Yeah some people on here have double standards as you can see. I can speak only for myself and I highly against censorship and I think itâs dumb on the open source protocol but still we have some devs who try to to implement dumb tools đ€·ââïž
I dont think there should be censorship at the protocol level. Implementers can do what they want. The more implementations the better, the more user choice, the better, imho. It took me a long while to actually realize that the other side was being censored. It was clearly a hit piece. However it contained largely public information (we found out later).
Ce fut paradoxalement non Melvin!? Surtout sur l'appel au bannissement couplĂ© d'insultes ils ont tous rĂ©agi sans recul sur le coup de l'affect, surtout sur X d'ailleurs j'ai dĂ» faire un feedback de recadrage Ă Uncle Rockstar..leurs rĂ©actions ont plus exacerbĂ© l'effet du tweet de Katherine Long . Il aurait fallu plus de professionnalisme agir entre adultes et laisser Fiatjat rĂ©pondre aux allĂ©gations en termes de droits et puis la mise en danger de sa vie sous couverture. En quoi se permettaiejt de faire des liens de leurs tweets avec Elon Musc et communities pour des professionnels qui venaient d'assister au Freedom Forum d'Orly ..!!:Cela donne matiĂšre Ă rĂ©flĂ©chir voire se poser sur la grille de lecture que certains ont de la LibertĂ© d'expression puis les droits des individus...Personne n'a le droit d'attaquer en public un autre individu qu'ils ont tous estimĂ© incompĂ©tent .. personne est-ce l'Ă©talage individualisĂ© de la rĂ©partition des fonds allouĂ©s qui fut d'ailleurs un document de Fiatjat !? Je m'interroge depuis mĂȘme je suis toujours en observation et analyse de cette nouvelle plateforme depuis le debut