Who defines hate? Who defines truth? All centralized platforms will inevitably be forced to be the arbiter, willingly or not. It's an impossible problem.

The only solution is to remove central control and push it to the edges. It's messy, it's imperfect, but it's much preferable to the alternative.


Great Note!


basicly, hate and truth are what someone says... but truth is defined every 10 minutes, and definition of hate is personal, I guess 🤷♂


Ill take messy. Back to old school mssg boards.  If you don’t like something, just block em.


Similar to the pricing system, edges are much more accurate/perfect than the rough approximation of anything established by committee (at best, considering they act honest)


You define hate. You define truths. What says any platform decides any of this at all for you? Research truths, verify hates, but it’s all contingent on how you view these things without influence from a platform.

Decentralized for the win. But if things don’t change fast enough you can simply not participate in the other platforms and all of their bullshit, all the meanwhile live a meaningful and full life 🤷♂ just my opinion/thoughts ✌


⚡⚡/A\  |R)  \V/  |I|  |N|⚡⚡


Onward 🫡


Free will? We all gonna let that die? Seriously, I’m fine with it but we know some people will use this to further their agenda of “spirituality warfare.”


Community Notes has been a major step forward, imo. Not perfect but at least it counteracts some of the centralized fact checking.


There is only ONE truth;
REALITY.

Aside from that, every 100 years there's a new set of humans. Just like we don't get to pick the family we're born into, this is the family that's alive when we are and there's nothing we can do about it but try to get along and pursue our own happiness.


So pleased someone is asking who can define hate. I have been asking the same thing. Hate is subjective. I can be offended but others find it a banter. We are complex being due to our cultural differences, upbringing, experiences, values and beliefs. Not a fan of centralise censorship because someone will always abuse whoever wield it. It is in human nature. 🫂❤


I'd say, from what I have learned: we do not see REALITY but **OUR REALITY.**  ☺🫂


People should also be permitted to express hate


Which one is that?


It will become that.


Fuckin’ A


Thanks for this!


Rules with rulers


life is messy. life is imperfect. nostr is simply reflecting reality. what the hell more do people want?


Yes


Who defines the definers?


HODL strong 🫡


Yep


💯

nostr:note1ghlaxt7q9whfd5tgkz0gpz9w55uwvtcrp9xhs69dzg87knmj84zqhxvdy4


Everyone


Onward 🫡


Zap


didn't you now? 😁


And who defines the definer’s definers?

Where does it end?


The definers are undefined. For they can define only as mutable points in space.


shocking how few seem to be able to let go of the desire to contort nature to their will, and instead surrender to contorting themselves, to natures will.


I trust my government and the media to do this for me. So I cant get uncomfortable speech. 🤍


Who defines hate? Who defines truth? All centralized platforms will inevitably be forced to be the arbiter, willingly or not. It's an impossible problem.

The only solution is to remove central control and push it to the edges. It's messy, it's imperfect, but it's much preferable to the alternative.


we all are satoshis😉


Hate not. But discrimination can be evaluated objectively. And I would not defend any kind of bullying for free speech. No time soon.


I agree


bangbang 🫡


freedom unleashed


⚡ LIVE FREE ⚡


Be the change! 🧡


Very well spoken! 🧡


trUth is in nUm₿ers & its transcendental.

Everything that exists came fr0m ⊙ne.

Everything moves in Pi.

Everything generates in Phi.

Everything grows in e.

Everything annihilates in ShUnya.

Everything sUstains in @X.


It’s a great question. It would seem to me that it corresponds to reality that there IS an objective point of reference out there somewhere.

I do not believe any human can fill that role.

Perhaps it’s a clue to the necessity for something transcendent.


Onward 🫡


Community notes are great. A step in the right direction for sure. The community notes that I'd love to see emerge would be along the lines of  "people who usually disagree with each other agree on XY" - we can absolutely do that, and I think it would be powerful.


This wraps up the subject.

nostr:note1ghlaxt7q9whfd5tgkz0gpz9w55uwvtcrp9xhs69dzg87knmj84zqhxvdy4


Maybe...

If you run down hate long enough, and relentlessly enough, it spirals back into Love.

Perceived reality is a spiral around supposed polarities.


Everything is imperfect


Supposedly that's how it works, but I haven't looked at the algorithm. It's open source.


Although, there are lots of smart people who agree on a lot…so, one wouldn’t want to miss those folks


People tend to want someone to control what they can’t or don’t want to understand according to their moral convictions. That’s where centralized platforms fit in. 😐


one's goal should be continuously seeking truths without biases


pv 🤙


It's called Apartheid. It's a system that believes in separation of individuals, nations or communities based on some ideology.


Centralized control has a lot of practice and tools and allies within the system. Centralized control is like corruption part of the system.
No politician or single person can change it - only freedom technology can.

#nostr #bitcoin #cashu #fedimint


You raise a crucial question: who holds the power to define hate or truth?

Indeed, any centralized system inevitably imposes a subjective, often biased, view of these concepts.

 Decentralization is the only viable path to avoid this forced arbitration.

While the model may be imperfect, it allows for a greater diversity of perspectives and ensures better freedom of expression.

 Centralization, on the other hand, always ends up restricting this freedom in favor of a dominant narrative.


Well said


Humanity is messy but preferable centralized monitoring/control.  We have always thrived best in small groups