82
lucash.dev 2y ago

Me: I don’t want to delegate to a third party deciding what is and isn’t spam. I don’t want to delegate it to a relay and I don’t want to delegate it to my “friends”. Nostr doesn’t let me do that.

Person who never thought about censorship resistance or how it can be achieved before Jack donated to Nostr:

“Censorship resistance doesn’t mean forcing people to see your content”

The same dialogue multiple times and the exact same answer — verbatim.

Who the heck invented that nonsensical argument and why would anyone think it counters what I said?

Reply to this note

Please Login to reply.

Discussion

Avatar
⚡A C V⚡ 2y ago

Yeah, we should, at the protocol, provide a mechanism for spam moderation such that we don't need relays to do moderation just to keep from being DDoS.

Users should be empowered and spam prevention is really fundamental, but we don't want to divide communities or trust other agents to decide what is spam. That invisibly permits content moderation right beside spam moderation.

I still don't know that we'd ever be able to prevent content moderation, but enabling smaller niche hobbyist relays to exist and function well, without being DDoS or costing so much in resources, is a big step towards ensuring that it really doesn't matter if some relays moderate content too much, if you have client support for work. I would assume that the easier it is to run a relay the more relays are likely to exist that will accept your speech.

Avatar
symbsrcool 2y ago

I think it’s neat that I can set a follow distance in iris.to so I only see people X degrees of “follow separation” from people I follow.

It’s like crowdsourcing spam prevention to the people I follow, who they follow, up to the follow distance. And if everyone blocks/mutes any bad actors / spam they help people who follow them too!

82
lucash.dev 2y ago

I understand that you want that and that’s fine.

However, I think that’s not fundamentally different from trusting a relay or Twitter.

In fact I probably trust, say Elon Musk, or jb55 better than a crowd of people I follow and the people they follow.

While we can discuss the merits of each approach, what I find really astounding is the suggestion that I not thinking the “social graph” approach is a good idea means I want to force people to see content — and somehow I “redefined” censorship resistance to mean forcing everyone to see some content.

People either haven’t thought about it and are just calling me names in a weird way — or have a bizarre definition of what “forcing” means.

Avatar
symbsrcool 2y ago

Hmmm well I was just thinking it’s a neat idea, that you can benefit from other people blocking spam. I’m assuming that’s on top of the normal monitoring one would do. It’s not like that rule takes away your other choices in who you follow - you can still follow anyone you want.