Replying to Avatar eliza

I could write an entire book on this topic specifically because I’ve been anticipating this moment happening for a few years. I’ll try to keep it short but it’s nuanced.

8 days….

The EU has demanded that corporate tech providers comply with aspects of the DSA (digital services act) by the 31st.

The UK should be done with the Online Safety Bill by the 31st unless Ofcom pushes that back a few weeks. I don’t think that they will.

I have a lot to say about these pieces of legislation as a survivor advocate both positive and negative. There will be positive changes for many survivors that come out of the legislation and it’s disingenuous to act otherwise. There will be negative impacts on some survivors as well. There are different types of online abuses and every survivor has their own story so to paint with a broad brush is not accurate. Each survivor deserves an opportunity to decide the path that is best for them.

I have a lot to say as a person who believes in free speech, encryption, privacy rights and the freedom to remain anonymous online.

These types of changes could impact nostr. I came to nostr early in anticipation of this moment in history. If I figured it out others will as well.

My hope is that activists, political dissidents, whistleblowers, journalists and any citizen globally who desires freedom finds nostr.

The survivors that want to speak anonymously and otherwise in a censorship resistant way might have to leave corporate tech providers eventually. It’s not safe for all survivors to have the governments and those in positions of power navigating the narrative. It’s not safe for everyone to have to enter an ID to speak. Nostr could provide the safety that those individuals deserve.

I believe that those survivors who are best served by the changes to corporate tech via the legislation should remain on corporate tech to share their experiences, strength, hope and resources. I don’t believe that Nostr would be the best fit for all survivors right now.

I’ll be here on nostr ready to welcome the others negatively impacted by the legislation with open arms.

I do see many survivors as whistleblowers in a way. Just remember the survivors of Epstein-Maxwell went to the FBI over a decade before he was finally brought to justice. The corporate press knowingly covered for him and we still don’t know exactly who all in positions of power have been involved. Huge banks covered for him a well. It took the relentless bravery of the survivors to bring them down. The bravery of the survivors is really the only thing that has brought forth change.

Epstein isn’t the only Epstein. Survivors deserve an opportunity to speak freely and anonymously in a censorship resistant environment regardless of who their abuser is.

I’m grateful that Nostr is available as a human rights tool for those who might need it. 💜

I'm firmly of the position that the Online Harms Bill is one of the most draconian pieces of legislation I have seen in a while, and if I am to take "survivor" as someone who has lived through abuse, then I would question the conviction of the British ruling class to protect anyone from abuse , given that they have habitually covered up the abuse of children and adults in the past. This isn't about the protection of people from abuse , this is about the expansion of powers and surveillance, and I think that , to borrow from your words, it is disingenuous to act otherwise.

I don't think that it is productive to treat one of the most harmful pieces of legislation to private life in Britain as a "necessary evil" as you seem to be putting it forward as.

Reply to this note

Please Login to reply.

Discussion

I say that respectfully , in the spirit of debate, rather than personally , I hope you understand.

I understand your concerns. I share some of your concerns. I can’t change the legislation passing but what I can do is change how I react to changes as a survivor advocate.

I think that encouraging Nostr for those who are negatively impacted by the changes is a good pathway forward. 💜