Subnostr

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.

boston wine 2y ago

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

Reply to this note

Please Login to reply.

Discussion

mark tyler 2y ago

I hope so 🫂

Goes in line with my general hope that free humans gravitate to the good.

boston wine 2y ago

🫂💜 while I don’t know if goodness will win, I do believe that tools like nostr give it a far better chance

Undisciplined 2y ago

Those incentives weren't exogenous, though. They emerged in an environment of competing for eyeballs.

If anything was artificial, wouldn't it be the civility that existed when there were only three channels? That lack of competition was entirely due to broadcast licensing and pretty strict content censorship.

As we've gotten more voices to choose from, we've (obviously not you and I specifically) chosen more toxic options.

boston wine 2y ago

I think the toxic structure specifically was artificial, because it became clear - over time - that to generate the most ad revenue, a platform needed to manipulate their users.

If platforms and content creators can instead earn money directly from users, who willingly send sats for content they actually want, it completely turns the old incentive structure on its head.

That’s how I’m envisioning this, at least, and I believe that this prospect is one of the reasons people are so excited about using, growing, and building on nostr 🤙

Thank you btw, I really appreciate thought-provoking conversation 🤝