Zaps actually solve a problem. Because on Nostr and other twitter-like social media platforms, likes and following are not of much value since very easy to fake.
Accounts of recognized people following you are valuable. But those are scarse and most, even very relevant users, will never be followed my an account of real Musk or Trump - or whoever else's of less then 100 who average reader would recognize.
Long and Thouhtful replies are kind of representative of how relative one is, but those are still free of charge and most of replies are short, dumb and meaningless - easy enough to fake with bots.
The cool part about nostr's zaps, is that it is a monetary representation of how grateful people are for your post. Which means, in practice, that, unlike faking your follower count or amount of likes, zaps are actually representive of how useful you are to the readers. because it costs.
Creating multiple empty accounts to like a post is quick and easy. Add linking your lightning wallet to all those - much harder. More time consuming and is not free (of charge) because using lightning and bitcoin in general costs fees. Can't zap back and forth forever.
zap4follow would be "pay4follow" on instagram twitter or mastodon.
Which would be hidden from the public. But because zapping is so convinient on Nostr, it is common to zap4follow - which, at least, is revealed to the public.
Well, english is not my first language, so i might be wrong. It is a linguistic argument, really.
But is it not why we use different words? Is it not to communicate different meanings?
Who's a thief?
Well, Someone (a 'thief') who, without catching attention, while you are at work, without making much noise, walks (or even breaks) into your house, takes something and leaves. 'Steals' it.
Or a pickpocketer is a kind of thief. someone who silently, without your knowing, slips something out of your pocket.
I argue that someone who stops you on the street, shows you their holstered gun and asks for your watch isn't.
In a store, when Mr. Greygloves silently puts something in their pocket and walks out without paying, he commits a 'theft'. More accurately, a shoplifter.
If Mr. Greygloves was to talk to the cashier and THREATEN him with violence if he (the cashier) does not give him the cash,
would that not be a robbery?
Mr. Cooper boards on a plane and silently slips the in-flight magazine into his suitcase. That's a theft.
If Mr. Cooper was to board on a plane and silently hand a piece of paper to the attendant
"miss, i have a bomb in my briefcase. I demand USD200,000",
would Mr. Cooper not be a robber of century? No immidiate violence. Just the threat of it.
Another example:
Man in a suit, early 30s, fit, approaches your shop's manager and, with italian accent, politely - without immidiate violence - asks that you pay the 'racket'. You could imagine - or you heard from your fellow workers - how many bones were left intact on the last guy who answered "no". If you give him the money, is that really just theft?
Yet, when that guy has an IRS badge on his suit, it suddenly is (a theft and not robbery) ?
Are they not?
The gunpoint was a rhetoric example of "theft" against "robbery".
But - are taxes not charged at gunpoint? ever tried to not pay those?
IRS agent knocking down your door is exactly "charging at gunpoint" - even that it does not always come to violence.
One not seeing violence everyday does not mean it is not come should you not listen to the state. It might be preceded by a flair of civilization - fines, notices, court hearings, but ultimately it comes down to "pay it or we raid your home, take all you have and put you in jail".
What is the first excuse they give imprisoning an oppositioner? "booh, he evaded taxes"
That is linguistically incorrect.
A theft would be VAT that is not disclosed at checkout.
Robbery is the proper word - there is no " theft at gunpoint" but there is " robbery at gunpoint ".