Decentralization doesn’t mean anarchy. Also, they are usually better than the ones implemented of the a central coordinator because they can end up being establish less and in perspective of social norms and you will society of the people who are subject to they.

Decentralization doesn’t mean the majority of things by itself. You can find “decentralized” setups who do moderation fairly well (age.g., Mastodon otherwise really oldschool net message boards, in which discover sooner anyone responsible). That it (Nostr), particularly , renders fun of these configurations.

So you can reasonable any program, there must be affordances for moderation and you will individuals(s) accountable towards profiles of system. In so far as i can tell, like any blockchain systems, the fresh new Nostr opportunity provides effectively removed (nearly) all of the affordances for creating moderation. Since the new Nostr audience seems to overlap considerably having crypto enthusiasts, I think its position is largely the same: zero moderation, zero “censorship”, etcetera. Due to the fact there can be literally child pornography stored towards Bitcoin blockchain at this time, I really don’t envision your conflict keeps you to “decentralization” can simply Jeff Goldblum it and you will “be able” versus explicit affordances / responsibility.

Nostr produces fun of your own indisputable fact that you can have centralized moderation and you may actions they explicitly towards the relays. It is doing new exchange owner to see which is welcome or otherwise not.

Which practically form unanimous arrangement is necessary one of all the relays in acquisition to help you average things. In addition you should never see what incentive / responsibility relays face to remove articles. Thus. I really don’t notice that strategy being particularly effective. However, hey! In the event the more a couple dozen individuals find yourself actually using the thing, suppose we will read! Continue reading →