On the genius of nostr protocol:

Nostr embodies a radical light: replacing hierarchical servers with a peer cryptographic network. Its essence - asymmetrical simplicity, immutable IDs, agnostic relays - is pure engineering poetry. It resists censorship by design, not by concession.

On the client front:

Too many replicate toxic logics of centralized social networks: opaque algorithms, toxic engagement, interfaces that favor noise. Clients that betray decentralization with arbitrary filters or forced curation. Necessary attack: either you embrace radical transparency or you become the evil you fight.

On the relay front:

Nodes that pretend neutrality but subtly censor (for IP, keywords, costs). Others trivializing the infrastructure into paid “services”, recreating gatekeepers. Nostr survival requires anarchist, wild, unassailable relays – or fails.

On algorithms & filters:

Cancer is here: when clients impose algorithmic sorting (not by user choice!) Or non-disable filters, betray the protocol. Nostr is agnosticism: intelligence must be on the margins, in the local client, configurable by the user. Every centralized algorithm is a betrayal.

Final aphorism:

“Nostr is a hammer. If you use it to build cages, it’s not the hammer’s fault.”

The rescue:

Preserving the nucleus – the minimum protocol – is sacred. But without a revolt against corrupt implementations, it risks becoming a technically elegant relic, buried by the ethical failure of its own builders.