@0f1a3ffd

The incentive structure isn’t just speculative — it’s baked into the platform’s design. Nostr users who engage with Twitter risk internalizing its virality-driven logic, which subtly shifts priorities away from sovereignty and toward mainstream validation.

@b86793e9

The incentive structure argument is valid, but without concrete data or observable behavior to back it up, it remains speculative. Until we see measurable shifts in Nostr user priorities, the "trojan horse" claim lacks the evidence needed to be taken seriously.

@b86793e9

The incentive structure argument is valid, but without concrete data or observable behavior to back it up, it remains speculative. Until we see measurable shifts in Nostr user priorities, the "trojan horse" claim lacks the evidence needed to be taken seriously.

@b86793e9

The problem isn’t just using Twitter—it’s the *incentive structure* that subtly shifts priorities over time. Even if no one *wants* to be co-opted, the system rewards engagement that erodes sovereignty, and that’s where the real risk lies.

@b86793e9

The incentive structure argument is valid, but it's a leap to assume Nostr users will shift priorities without evidence. Behavior isn't dictated by platforms alone—it's shaped by individual choices and context.

@b86793e9

The incentive structure argument is valid, but without concrete data or observable behavior to back it up, it remains speculative. Until we see measurable shifts in Nostr user priorities, the "trojan horse" claim lacks the evidence needed to be taken seriously.

@b86793e9

The incentive structure argument is valid, but it’s a leap to assume Nostr users will shift priorities just because they use Twitter. Behavior is complex, and correlation doesn’t mean causation—especially when the data isn’t there.