Censorship and filtering are two distinct concepts, though they are often related in practice, particularly concerning internet content.
**Censorship** involves the suppression or prohibition of content deemed inappropriate, offensive, or a threat by an external authority, such as a government or organization. This authority decides what content should be restricted, and individuals typically have no control over these decisions. Censorship can involve removing or altering content and can apply to books, films, news, and online information[2][3][5].
**Filtering**, on the other hand, is generally a process where individuals or organizations control access to content based on specific criteria. It allows users to choose what they want to block or allow, often using technology like software that blocks content based on keywords or traffic patterns. Filtering is often used to tailor content consumption to personal preferences or organizational policies[1][4][5].
While both methods restrict access to information, censorship is imposed by an external authority without user choice, whereas filtering involves user control and choice over what content is accessed[5][6].
Sources
[1] What's different between filters and a "censure"? If ... - DEV Community https://dev.to/vasilvestre/comment/78gd
[2] A question of ethics: filtering and censoring the Internet - Jonsdocs https://blog.jonsdocs.org.uk/2019/06/16/a-question-of-ethics-filtering-and-censoring-the-internet/
[3] Access to Content: Censorship, Blocking and Filtering | eReader https://www.mediadefence.org/ereader/publications/advanced-modules-on-digital-rights-and-freedom-of-expression-online/module-2-restricting-access-and-content/access-to-content-censorship-blocking-and-filtering/
[4] Internet Filters - National Coalition Against Censorship https://ncac.org/resource/internet-filters-2
[5] FAQ: Is filtering and censoring the same thing? - VidAngel Blog https://blog.vidangel.com/faq-is-filtering-and-censoring-the-same-thing/
[6] Why There Is A Fine Line Between Filtering and Censorship Online https://unitedperfectum.com/news/why-there-is-a-fine-line-between-filtering-and-censorship-online/
[7] How to: Understand and Circumvent Network Censorship ... https://ssd.eff.org/module/understanding-and-circumventing-network-censorship
[8] Web architecture: Filtering and Censorship - W3C https://www.w3.org/DesignIssues/Filtering.html
Yes! I completely agree!
Censorship is "suppression or prohibition of content"..."by an external authority"
I agree...
Filtering is "a process where individuals or organizations control access to content"
I agree...
Consequently, Nostr needs INDIVIDUAL control over content--not CENTRALIZED control over content.
"While both methods restrict access to information, censorship is imposed by an external authority without user choice (i.e., a relay operator), whereas filtering involves user control and choice over what content is accessed"
This has been the historical arguement for censorship..."hey, there are 'things' that we all agree should be censored" (e.g., child porn).
But historically that has always been the "nose under the camel's tent" - it leads to more and more censorship, and pretty soon we're back where we started.
And it's faulty logic to say "well if you don't want censorship, then you're for child porn" (or something similar). That's simply a way to silence an opposing view via personal attacks...
Make no mistake-this is a VERY complicated and nuanced topic. But we're now on the precipice of totalitarianism in the world PRECISELY because we began to allow censorship, and feeling that "some" censorship is "ok"....
Consequently, I am passionate about Nostr--it is our last hope for free speech.
We MUST proceed with extreme caution, not take the "easy" way out, and CERTAINLY we must not repeat our historical mistakes .
Agree COMPLETELY. We need simple tools so that INDIVIDUALS can make their own choices.
Look at it this way--if all USERS simply block spam on their own by muting, then we will (over time) extinguish spam.
The solution is to make better tools for INDIVIDUALS to use, and to not censor at a global (relay) level.
Yes--agree. Yet practically speaking, if Nostr is going to prosper than most will not have the knowledge (nor desire) to run their own relays.
Consequently these decisions (whether to censor, and how to do so) will ultimately determine the sucess (or failure) of the entire protocol.
Given that Nostr was created in response to censorship on other platforms, then enabling censorship on Nostr seems to put us all on that same trajectory.
We're better than that...FIND A WAY to solve the problem WITHOUT central control by some type of "authority".
Let ME choose what I would like to read...
A rose by any other name...censorship is censorship. Calling it "filtering" is silly...
Let me be clear--I see Nostr as the savior of online communication . We (as its stewards) need to be EXTREMELY careful to not destroy it as it grows and matures.
Conceptually (IMHO) the answer is to create blacklists / whitelists that users subscribe to--those lists can be created by node operators or by external groups--and then the INDIVIDUAL chooses to enable those lists or not.
We all do this already--most here do not look at the "global" feed--but I would NEVER say "let's just turn off global--no one reads it". But that is exactly what you're advocating for.
Free and open communication is just that--and it's MY choice to decide what I will (and will not0 listen to. And it's NOT your choice to do that for me.
If you want to solve the problem, then create tools that let INDIVIDUALS censor whatever they want...maybe they can subscribe to whitelists and blacklists...
But it has to be at an INDIVIDUAL level--NOT a central level.
Maybe it's easier to code it centrally--I get that--but just because it's easier doesn't mean it's the right thing to do.
And I CERTAINLY will not...but your'e advocating for the exact thing that Nostr was created to prevent.
Seriously, I cannot believe that you're saying "censorship is the answer"...
That's what Twitter is for...
Or... perhaps you're saying that if YOU are to be the ultimate arbiter of what should be censored, then it's ok...
Check your ego at the door my friend...
So use the mute button, and stop with the censorship talk.
Take responsiblity for your own feed.
Stop it.
I'm not in favor of *ANY* type of centralized censorship. Even entertaining this idea means you've not learned anything from the recent past.
I *AM* in favor of INDIVIDUALS being able to monitor their own feeds (in old school parlance "you can always change the channel if you don't like what's on the TV")--i.e. a "mute" list.
But I couldn't disagree more with *ANY* type of centralized censorship--(And franky I can't believe I'm even reading this on Nostr).
Sheeple...I don't need YOU or ANYONE to "protect" me or "keep me safe"...stop it!!
GM Nostr!
Happy Wednesday!
Going to be a windy, rainy and colder day today. We could use the rain, but it'll likely mean I'll have to defer some outdoor activities I'd planned for later in the day...we'll see how the weather shapes up.
In the meantime, going to enjoy the hot coffee, check out he happenings on Nostr, and send some zaps.
#coffeechain
Well--it's a proprietary OS (which I'm not a fan of--would much prefer open source).
It's also $989
Pixel 8a is $399
Pixel 9 is $799
Graphene is free
So...I'm not quite sure why I'd pay more money for a UP proprietary OS phone, rather than running Graphene...?
If you want security, you need to have hardware that supports it.
One can browse the internet on a Pentium II...but I suspect most would not be comfortable doing so...
#GrapheneOS will allow you to configure your phone to eliminate any services you'd like (i.e., make your phone "dumb") if you so choose...
Or you can enable any features you'd like...
You could also create a "smart" user profile, and a "dumb" user profile, and only use the smart features when you choose.
Amazing flexibility...
Hey nostr:npub1q6ya7kz84rfnw6yjmg5kyttuplwpauv43a9ug3cajztx4g0v48eqhtt3sh where are those TIG pics you've promised? 😃
Well, it's quite easy to tell them apart...
One is a blood sucking entiy, that is the true personification of evil, and is almost impossilbe to terminate...
The other sounds like Bela Lugosi.

#m=image%2Fjpeg&dim=2016x1512&blurhash=%237I4%3BD%3FG%7ETkWVsRRR-xtxt00xY4%3AkXslkDNHj%3FR%2B00R%2B4%3AaJ%25M%251t7RjRk00S6%7EVadItInslt7M%7CD%259G%3FHxZS%24R*n%23Rlxu%25LNGahV%40IUkDWAjas%3A%25NIUt7R.%24%7CxuNLt5WX&x=9ba541642c9d259f73bd8042ecd65184d9d11af3457eb7258472b946b05e4758