Most people are sceptical of the information gathered over a system of distributed decision-making.

Be a chad

GM

Bitcoin means separation of money and place.

Nostr means separation of communication and place.

When life feels like the right hand side, its just part of the learning curve.

Patience.... is key, padowan.

Before the rain.

This.

Do you know when Noah built the ark?

Assume GitHub started to censor. Then nostr immediately won.

nostr is still mainly used alongside twitter. in the best rare case, as a replacement. and only because people are running away from something about twitter they don't like.

there is nothing that people want to run to nostr for yet. zaps were promising, but bitcoin is still a hurdle (one that primal is doing the best at overcoming), and it's doubtful lightning could scale to a massive adoption moment.

nostr needs a feature or experience that's unique and sets it apart. i *think* that is the ecosystem of microapps over the long term...but it's definitely not in the short term. and that might be ok.

for twitter the initial draw was the simplicity and weirdness of 140 characters (we started with zero network effect, facebook had it all...that's built over time). later it became the conversation which lead to the "public square" (owned by a private corporation ¯\_(ツ)_/¯). and then as it grew, it had a single point of control/failure people could attack.

nostr doesn't have to worry about that last bit. it's an incredible feature. but not one the average person cares about (no matter how much they yell "FREE SPEECH!"...if people actually cared about free speech, bitcoin and nostr would be all they used...they don't).

all this to say, we're not doomed. but what we think is the killer feature isn't right now. who's going to discover the one that is?

outbox model one of a very small handful of fundamentals concept that make nostr what it is.

On Propaganda

---------------------

A while back, I had a friend that was a pastor and he was railing about guns on Facebook, how they should be banned and so on. What had brought on this tirade was a shooting by a Muslim guy which left a bunch of people dead.

In a sense, I understood his anger. At a very surface level, a bunch of people died, so there had to be someone or something to blame. Indeed, every shooting of any kind brings out these emotions, and the powers that be are especially good at using tragedies to further their own agenda.

Indeed, that's one of the evil things every authoritarian does is exploit times of vulnerable emotional states to further their agenda. Some would even say they manufacture such instances. But the point is that they further *their*agenda, and not what should be learned.

My pastor friend for example had many other angles to approach the topic that he was far more qualified to talk about. He's studied theology and other religions, so he could have talked about radical Islam and aspects of that which led to the shooting. He's also counseled a lot of people, so he could talk about mental health and talk about what puts people in those states of mind. He's also a Christian who knows the depravity of man, so he could talk about how sin and vice lead to these tragic outcomes. Instead, he talked about guns, because that was what the elites were focused on. He had never held or shot a gun and couldn't tell you the first thing about them, like what's considered automatic or semi-automatic.

Yet because the propaganda was strong, he spoke exactly on the issue the elites wanted him to talk about and placed the blame on the thing the elites wanted him to place blame on.

This guy, by the way, was not stupid. He's an Ivy League graduate and very sharp. But perhaps that's why he was so susceptible to propaganda. His success was largely based around following what the authorities told him. Intellect is no protection against powerful rhetoric.

We all outsource some of our knowledge, but the problem with a fiat system is that we all too often are *forced* to trust entities that we had no input in. These entities are the most likely to get corrupted and used for tyranny.

We need more interactions, more direct connections so that we can figure out whether someone is trustworthy. That's a decentralized trust model and it's about time we get used to judging such things for ourselves.

Pura Vida!

Soon, you won't trust any media you see or hear, unless it's been signed by the proper nsec.

Nostr solves for prank calls and fake news.