Obviously relays and and apps can get shut down.. The difference in shutting down Telegram vs. Nostr (the actual protocol) is that you shut down a centralized unit and users can't do shit with their data posted there after shutdown compared to shutting down Amethyst, people just login somewhere else with their key pair and it's all back. The protocol lives and new simple self hosted protocol using apps can be built.

Replies (3)

🐈's avatar
🐈 1 year ago
Yeah it will survive, no doubt about that, but surviving and thriving are different things. We don’t want to simply survive, we want to thrive no matter the levels of global pressure. Right now I can’t see how we’d do that.
I think that's the better phrasing you were trying to aim at. Not that nostr can be shut down, or that it can be prevented from thriving, but heavily suppressed to thrive. With that in mind, I think the goal here then is to keep on working and trying to make more useful products that deliver more value then current ones in the marke, and new values. Hard? Definitely. Possible? Definitely. When? Hopefully sooner rather than later with an exponential rate.
That would be really hard, it would hard to thrive with government actors breathing down your necks, It's not that hard to survive though, it takes an immense amount of wealth, coordination and knowledge to keep up the censor on something that is this decentralized. Maybe we don't need to pack a punch? Maybe we just need to tire them out? Anyways my two sats. Agree with your sentiments on fortifying ofcourse. I'm more worried about things that are already centralized and in govt control. Like github. What @Colby Serpa is building is extremely important.