Avatar
david
e5272de914bd301755c439b88e6959a43c9d2664831f093c51e9c799a16a102f
neurologist and freedom tech maxi Co-founder @ NosFabrica 🍇 Grapevine, 🧠⚡️Brainstorm

#100aDayUntil100k

#100aDayTil100k

Day 29 ☑️

Also leg day🦿

First month done! Can't wait to see what month 2 brings! ⚡ 😃

GM! 🌞 ☕️

Do you know if the pitch contest is going to be recorded? I’d love to watch it. Although I understand if they choose not to do it for privacy reasons.

#100aDayUntil100k

#100aDayTil100k

Day 28 ✅

#100aDayUntil100k

#100aDayTil100k

Day 27 ✔️

Replying to Avatar david

Exactly

Or a repeat of exec order 6102, with ETFs the low hanging fruit

Nostr will be the springboard for the world’s first decentralized digital languages.

That may not make sense yet, but it will.

One use case I see for WoT will be to help us to identify people who are qualified and could be trusted as adjudicators for when a bounty has been met. And maybe a separate list for escrow agents.

#100aDayUntil100k

#100aDayTil100k

Day 26 ✅

To curate content, facts, and information, the web of trust must simultaneously curate our digital tools of communication.

pgf.tech

“with software the people created and as such doesn't spy on me”

💯 %

This is why the WoT needs to curate our software. Open source is better than proprietary, but open source tools are stewarded: GitHub repos have managers, internet standards are managed by committees, etc. Those managers, committees, etc may be well meaning, but are too sluggish. And sometimes they can be captured. WoT can curate our digital tools in a purely decentralized fashion, just like written and spoken languages. No stewards. No single points of failure.

Replying to Avatar Daniel Wigton

Interesting. Sorry for the delayed response I am only here on Sundays for a bit. But your ideas strike a chord with me. I am convinced that web of trust is the only final solution to scaling and filtering. The problem comes in initializing a web of trust that piggybacks on the in person web of trust that we all use to navigate society offline.

Our brains map trust and certainty across a functionally infinite series of scopes. I trust my father, a physician, with medical advice, but not technological, even then there are shades of certainty depending on subtopic.

I don't think we can build a successful web of trust absent the stakes of broken trust that we encounter in every day life. The backbone of the network needs to be real relationships with real people. Aliases and anonymity must be the exception that is enabled by the general rule. A web of trust needs to be used in common with day to day activities to be built with values of certainty that approximate useful weights.

The same web should underlie employee, student, and patient records, payment processing, communications, social contracts and obligations voting etc.

I like nostr because it flirts with some of the right ideas to make this possible, it is just a bit simplistic. I have been building my own thing, but as a stay at home dad, time is very limited and progress is slow. I see all the right ideas already floating around but they are never pulled together into a cohesive product.

If I sound like someone you wouldn't mind on your discord I'd be happy to join.

I think you’re absolutely correct about piggybacking on the WoT that we use offline. The way I see it, the basic methodology of real life WoT should be transferred into the digital realm as a protocol, and that’s what the tapestry protocol is designed to do. The difference is that our brains are limited to Dunbar’s number, about 150. More than that and we can’t keep track of all of the interpersonal relationships. But digital tools don’t have that problem. So imagine scaling from 150 to 8 billion. That’s what we’re going to do!