I'm definitely not here to shill for IPFS, just pointing out it was a design goal of that system. one of my favorite things about #[6] is his series of IPFS rants. only someone who was deeply interested in IPFS working could have tried it enough to get such a deep undestanding of its weaknesses. I have a similar experience.

the true innovation is the dissociating the verity of the content with the service provider. previously, the network effect drove returns and power exponentially to the party that owned the network. so in the case of twitter, they owned the underlying infrastructure and it didn't make sense to think of decentralizing twitter. the network effect was their seigniorage, the pay off for owning the network.

and just as bitcoin takes seigniorage out of the hands of centralizing elites, nostr takes the network effect premium out of the hands of the service provider and returns it only to the protocol. the more people use the protocol, the more protocol users benefit. service providers are thus incentivized to provide good services they can be paid for, but not to gatekeep. it's an exciting dynamic and why this model can work to induce a bottom up revolution in the flow of information.