My thinking on this recently turned things around in a sense. These platform have a luxury Nostr has not, in there being a complete global state of all the things on a 'single' database. This means that before you can even filter, you need to explore. Now i guess the main underlying thesis is that with 'dead internet TM' we are forced to do this regardless (eventually), and that the platforms only provide an increasingly crumbling facade of a sensible world. Bias is not just the way we achieve finding the content we prefer, it is how we differentiate signal from noise, the real from the fake by distributing trust via the social graph, in the first place. My point is, the 'pick your own algo' meme is not some cool feature as a result of liberating ourselves from the platforms; it is the unfortunate necessity as a result of the impending wave of chaos that would otherwise engulf us; something platforms won't save us from, regardless how totalitarian they become in an attempt to keep their facade alive. Then again, I started out by saying ‘recently’, but in a sense I have just been spinning my wheels for over a year
Constant's avatar Constant
This NOSTR stuff is not going to bring a 'better internet'; rather its embracing we passed peak-internet-goldenage already and things are bound to only get worse. Now to be fair and clear, that internet golden age was a short term fantasy where capital subsidized the server capacity believing they could effectively monetize the platforms eventually, on the one hand; and intrinsicly motivated sincere content creators able to do their thing before getting harrassed by the censorship and noise inducing wrestle for power/controll by political interests, on the other. image
View quoted note →

Replies (3)

There's ye olde argument that the economics of electricity and chips means duplication of labour vis a vis crawling and indexing must be aggressively minimised for a wider solution to achieve any sort of longterm viability. If you've got dozens of Nostr clients all individually crawling and indexing the same relays (as the basis for each client's 'pick-your-own-algo' feature-slash-unfortunate necessity) then it represents quite some potential heat-loss overall. Friendly sharing can help, but, outside of the right incentive structure, might be hard to extend beyond early days. An interesting takes on that challenge here:
I will have a look. The way i see things now is that each individual client (nor user using multiples of clients for that manner) wont have to perform such exercises over and over again each time. Running such an operation should result in a product (simply put a list of events), which can then be used by others. Also, these operations can vary in terms of debth and width, adjusting to usecase irt available compute and bandwidth. At @npub18zsu...8aap we call this type of operation 'pulse'; a ripple through the mess of events out there guided by a construct of biasses on npubs and lists. In any event, i gues my main argument would be that computational efficiency is irrelevent because due to spam, data curration (signal/noise diffirentiation) will be the #1 challenge and i'd argue to only way to tackle that is in in a distributed manner (i.e. relying on a network and networks of networks of people applying sensemaking for themselves). Any walled garden will either be too limited or run over by weeds with nothing in between.
Josua Schmid's avatar
Josua Schmid 1 year ago
Even both: Ask the librarian for a book AND walk through the library to pick one yourself.