contextual WoT fixes this. you might align with someone on one context but not on another. you should remain connected with them on the aligned context, but 'unfollow' them on the other context.
authentic relationships are complex and not binary. tribalism is binary.
this is genius
I am adding this in my WoT notes to remind myself when I get to it
nostr:nprofile1qqsw2feday2t6vqh2hzrnwywd9v6g0yayejgx8cf83g7n3ue594pqtcpz9mhxue69uhkummnw3ezuamfdejj7qg4waehxw309aex2mrp0yhxgctdw4eju6t09uq36amnwvaz7tmwdaehgu3wvf5hgcm0d9hx2u3wwdhkx6tpdshsd8m8kr is leading the charge on this. look out for the WoT hackathon from nostr:nprofile1qqstu7l4mcrgc8vy9mf55lp8q5r7e9q0t6j3vuw06p32jh5ap9pq6zspr4mhxue69uhkummnw3ezucnfw33k76twv4ezuum0vd5kzmp0qy88wumn8ghj7mn0wvhxcmmv9uq3qamnwvaz7tmwdaehgu3wd4hk6tcfglh4w coming this month
i unironically think it is the only salvation for a viable networked society.
I think this fits well into the topical microblogging idea i have been kicking around
Where can I read more about that?
Can’t remember where I read this recently but it was the idea that small villages were better for humans because it forced you to learn to live with the multiplicity that is other people. You got better at it because you had no choice. Large cities allowed people to ignore others.
It’s likely impossible to return to that, but it stuck with me.
That's really good. do you remember where you read that? I'd like to learn more about it.
I suspect we have a "Dunbar's number" for each major social context (and perhaps a Dunbar's number of contexts), and that proper digital tools can help tease out and augment that structure.
Man, wish I could find the exact reference for you. Swear it was in a Hacker News thread or something… which now that I think about it was more about loneliness, which is ironic right. The common thread here is that the more connected we are in a networked/online society a) the more we fight and b) the more isolated we get.
Pretty sure Putnam’s Bowling Alone was referenced, which was originally written in 1995. It talks about declines in civic engagement since the 60s. I find it super interesting to read 30 years later because it looks prescient, similar to something like Amusing Ourselves to Death which was also pre-internet.
I have been thinking about this a lot lately. The internet fundamentally changed human society because it changed who you could be connected with. But the problem that arised was that you couldn't reach other people based on the offline connections you already had and big tech / social media algos became the permanent proxies
This is a video not directly related to the topic we are discussing but opened my mind to why web of trust would be very very important for nostr. Also, with the advancements in AI, without WoT, you'd need more and more privacy invading stuff to keep the internet working which can't last very long
This video connects to the conversation. If everyone is hyperconnected, both from a network theory + math perspective, and we actualize it with a persistent connection in your pocket available 24/7…. Why would people end up more isolated and disagreeable?
I think there is something to the idea that technology itself satisfies so many of our idiosyncratic desires that we are increasingly having a harder time communicating. If you have 8 billion unique worldviews, each getting more fragmented… then conflict and the resulting isolation is a natural result.
I think I have been saying this a while back, relationships are not single-dimensional either.
Kind of like saying blue hair is sexy but I don't agree with your politics.
This basically captures it, yes lol
There is a reason why evolution created tribal behavior patterns in us (and many animal species), we should not ignore that part.
Inevitably WoT is great for the twitter/social use case - for loose live-together situations - but tribal mode is better in staying committed and achieving concrete goals.
We are both of these.
