Solutions to fake news on nostr? Are we going to need Community Notes or something similar?
nostr:note1djlnzq44d2zele9gc8f2vj3aw4d4u2jzv5nvlnvu92jke40gaprq0euadk
Discussion
Are you asking if we need censorship?
Nope!
In this case it is on primal to clarify and build relation to it's users.
If primal is a good solution, it will be resiliant to things like this.
As an online environment I think we would do well to write a list of principles to point people to. Similar to the 10 principles of Burning Man perhaps. Here are some ideas, what would you add?
Verify the note (your own too)
Don't trust the note
Practice v4v
Participate (help build)
Be constructive (use your own skills)
Zap the other
Have a mindset
Accept bad notes as a a trade off
I’ve posted fake news on nostr before, reposted that I was wrong.
Own it, because if you post lots of stuff it’s likely to happen unwittingly eventually. Your reputation is yours to maintain.
That's good advice for the poster of (accidental) fake news.
I’m looking more for a solution for readers, it would have been nice if my client automatically added as a note Pablo’s post:
nostr:note1lrt7542lf0ljgzs07adl8z6a75nmw6aq9rcq0k0m568s9699954s9lgkam
with a reference to Miljan’s post
Which is basically a very simplified version of Community Notes
Ideally you would not hardcode Pablo as a trusted source for everybody, right? The "note" would have to be weighted relatively to whoever is reading.
I think NIP-32 labels are ideal for this.
Yes in this case it essentially requires clients to provide some way to easily label something as fake, and then for other clients to read the labels, make some decision probably based on follow graph on which labels to show or not.
Maybe NIP-32 is enough, I need to look into it again, last time I checked it seemed a bit complex.
curation is great, but it should be opt in. people need to be aware that things are being screened for them otherwise it is censorship.
"Curation" by a third party is censorship. Curation can only done by oneself.
i think there is a difference when you opt in to curation knowing what to expect. like forums back in the day, you go to a reptile forum you expect pictures of lizards but not cats. nothing against cats, but a cat forum probably wouldn't expect lizards there either... and Moderators clean up the porn spam and the occasional political post that someone on a reptile forum might not care to see either. it's opt in curation, which is self censorship. you're willing to risk missing a nice cat pic, but because you chose this particular reptile forum, you're ok with it. see how some might look at it?
NIP-32 is just adding tags to other people's events, with optional comments I think.
So you solve "the problem" of someone posting something that may be inaccurate, by letting other people mark their posts with tags that may also be inaccurate. Sounds like a great plan that surely will not backfire and will guarantee that minorities never get gangbanged by majorities.
Nah. Say no to fake news, and say no censorship.
Wouldn't you have preferred to know it was fake, if it was possible, before you reacted like this? This is possible to do without censhorship
No, what I'd like is the ability to delete and edit notes, on the other hand.
nope. the lack of ability to delete/edit keeps the non clinical insane from considering what they note put in a note. you're permitted to reply to your own note & state a change of mind, but you don't get to unsay something. life doesn't let you unring a bell
What is the difference between community notes and "fact checking" nonsense?
No, we can have a discussion about it just like any rational person should.
I think us, the users, should use hashtags and call out #bullshit or #spam or #spammmy or #liar or #fraudster depending on what we, again, the users, think.
reputations will be made or killed based on replies.
I posted a note of similar notions earlier this week. check it out.
#smij #zapd
Critical thinking and humility must be learned. Someone doing that for you is not freedom. Freedom demands responsibility.
The correct course of action was to see if the warning appears for themselves, then potentially confront nostr:npub16c0nh3dnadzqpm76uctf5hqhe2lny344zsmpm6feee9p5rdxaa9q586nvr directly for an answer to get his side, and *then* to decide an opinion.
Just my two cents. Community notes is just another form of only hearing one side.
This 👆
Probably up to the clients to find a way to do anything with it. More report options for stuff like this and clients can do what they want with the info.
I see there isn’t any way to report stuff like this in either Nostur or Damus, for example. Closest thing is spam.
nostr:npub1xtscya34g58tk0z605fvr788k263gsu6cy9x0mhnm87echrgufzsevkk5s nostr:npub18m76awca3y37hkvuneavuw6pjj4525fw90necxmadrvjg0sdy6qsngq955
Reputation system for users would be enough.
And to prevent bots to spam positive reputation, we can count only votes by peple we follow.
I am quite sure this is fake news as well, however look how well we all handled it without big brother telling us how to :)
Don't be stupid.
Just don't trust anything else or check it by yourself.
That's darn simple. No need the "Community Notes" or shits, cause bots could misuse it anyway (Noting Nostr protocol was easy)
community notes on nostr could be based on people you follow votes (helpful or not)