Tech creates affordances. Power decides which affordances get realized. Claiming tech determines culture is just another way to avoid confronting who has power and how they use it.

nice

https://annas-archive.li/blog/backing-up-spotify.html

I think its brilliant... ending punishes you for wanting cleverness :) Very consistent and structurally honest

Two weeks out from Bugonia (2025) and it's still colonizing my headspace: Lanthimos operating like some kind of precision instrument tuned to frequencies I didn't know I was receiving on. Whatever he drops next, I'm already infected.

yeah, there is no graph... I meant as a rough estimate of DAU

web archive have numbers from august https://web.archive.org/web/20250805111449/http://profilestr.com/reports :)

I found this https://profilestr.com/reports

"Without their consent" is manipulative framing - it implies theft when this is just voluntary exchange. Once you sell something, the buyer owns it and can do whatever they want with it.

I agree Nostr is technically superior - the architecture is sound. But these are just technical properties valid now.

Nostr is decentralized in technical terms, but socially and culturally it's pretty centralized. AT Protocol has architectural compromises, but could become more decentralized in practice depending on how the community evolves. It all depends on social dynamics, and this is what most builders completely ignore. You can have perfect cryptographic sovereignty and still end up with captured systems if economic incentives concentrate power, if the community becomes a tribal barrier, if cultural gatekeeping makes participation functionally impossible.

The technical foundation matters, but it doesn't determine outcomes. Whether a protocol actually liberates people or just creates different forms of capture - that's purely social. And most technical communities are terrible at recognizing this until it's too late.

You're strawmanning. I never said you need to agree with anarchism to use Nostr.

I said the opposite: neutral infrastructure doesn't require ideological agreement. That's what makes it neutral.

Who made that rule? You did. Just now. By trying to force a false choice between ideological purity and hypocrisy.

So why are you on Nostr?

You're arguing that dominant cultures will always impose rules and anarchist dreams are fantasyland - while using a censorship-resistant protocol built on exactly those "fantasy" principles.

Same for Bitcoin. These tools exist because people refused to accept "hierarchies are inevitable" and built alternatives into working code.

You're already using infrastructure that only works because it rejects the very principles you're defending.

Pretty much. I was bullied en masse by the black and trans community and called "racist" just because I discussed decentralization of AT Protocol or inverted colors of my avatar.

But you think the solution is to flip sides and embrace white supremacy? That's just the same institutional logic with inverted colors. Today's victims becoming tomorrow's oppressors doesn't break the cycle - it perpetuates it.

These people aren't evil - they're institutionalized. They're doing what captured institutions train people to do: use identity as a weapon to enforce conformity. But the answer isn't to build the opposite institution with the same weapons.

I'm an anarchist. I don't want to win the game of institutional power - I want to abolish the game. No hierarchies. No sides. No gatekeepers of any color telling anyone else how to live.

@nevent1qvz...

Fighting over who controls the gates misses the point. Abolish the gates.