Oddbean

The more free the network, the more susceptible it is to falsehood. Most have no recollection of a time when the mainstream viewed the totality of the Internet with suspicion. In the early/mid 90’s, it was extremely difficult to pass off online research as legitimate within academic circles because “anyone can say anything on the Internet.” In those days, if it couldn’t be corroborated by a print resource in the library, you didn’t bother. The skepticism was partly justified: outside of university-hosted Gopher servers, verifying sources was extremely difficult. We gleaned digital information with a raised eyebrow, and our “built-in bullshit detector” (as Hemingway described it) was always set to ten. It was the Wild West, a time where anything went, and it became even wilder after the invention of the Web Browser. The mainstreaming of the Internet brought with it “legitimate” information channels, and general attitudes regarding online information relaxed. For about 15 years (2000-2015), we lived in a mixed world where the establishment colonizers existed alongside we wild natives. And then those colonists attempted to take it all. Every pleb is familiar with this period, and this era is at least partially responsible for why you’re here. The move on centralized networks by political and corporate interests introduced an online tyranny I never thought possible, and with it, a new notion: everything you read on the Internet *has* be true. Of course, by this they simply meant vetted and approved as “true” by one of your self-appointed betters, who likely scoffs at the notion of absolute truth to begin with. I scare quote "disinformation" because the term evokes a slimy dishonesty in itself, signifying an attempt to control information rather than to safeguard truth. Twitter’s increased “disinformation” is a direct result of a more free platform. That Elon’s policies incentivize falsehood is immoral and stupid, pouring gas on the fire — but make no mistake here: my favorite con man of the last decade has loosened the reigns at Twitter significantly, and blatant falsehood is a byproduct. If, overnight, Nostr became Twitter, we’d have the same flood of disingenuous clowns tap dancing for sats, hurled at them by a population of applauding fools looking for confirmation bias. Nostr will not revolutionize the monetization of online identity, nor will it fix stupid. If you’re looking for a change in online social interaction, you won’t find it here either. Those who build on Nostr are akin to Prometheus stealing fire: as helpful as it is, one must accept that a lot of stuff is going to burn as a result. If we are truly committed to an open, uncontrollable protocol, then we must accept “disinformation” as one of the consequences. In fact, we must embrace it with a principled optimism, noting firmly that it is *not* the responsibility of the protocol to do a person’s thinking for them. That responsibility resides with the individual alone. So turn that bullshit detector back up to ten, and use the brain God gave you. The free exchange of ideas is worth it. nostr:note1hs2kd3ggmacpx2uz8wdk92egqhl2nypq2kd3s3zld3jufq2sexus6agyqs