Nostr enables the ONLY social network that has a chance at gaining mass market adoption AND has the potential to utilize POW for spam deterrence. No other clown world VC-funded ESG company will ever even consider using proof of work for anything.
One of the first arguments I always hear against POW is that raising the cost of posting a note will make it so only those with large amounts of hashpower will be able to post notes, and they will dominate the protocol with spam and psyops.
This argument doesn't make sense because if large entities will see value in expending their hashpower to spam nostr, then why aren't they spamming nostr right now while the cost to do so is absolutely free? They should be here already if it is worth their time to be, but it is not dominating nostr at all.
The fallacy is the assertion that those with great hashpower actually care to spend it spamming nostr only when it isn't free. In reality, they would rather spend that hashpower on ROI, like mining bitcoin. The ROI on spamming nostr will likely never match the ROI of spamming other social networks that have no POW cost.
When a normal user posts a dozen notes per day, the cost of adding a modest POW requirement is barely noticeable β roughly a webpage load time worth of waiting. But for a spammer, this cost becomes a material electrical expense that will reduce their capacity to spam. And with a dozen other social networks more popular than nostr, where do you think they will spend their time? Spamming the networks with zero POW costs, of course.
But, putting this POW barrier over nostr would allow legitimate users to flee to nostr for a spam- free experience while keeping spammers out. It could actually help nostr grow in its network effects.
Overall, I am shocked at how bearish people are on proof-of-work, especially bitcoiners.
