I agree that it is by far the best UX on Nostr, and I even said upthread that it would be my daily driver if it weren’t centralized. And that and also that it has the most people is exactly why it is absolutely dangerous for it to be so centralized. The largest client shouldn’t have the ability to subtly manipulate the reach/exposure of notes and identities without anyone being able to tell. That’s a capability that nobody should have, and sidesteps the entire point of Nostr.

yes, he's been a good poster in other threads I’ve seen him. I have no fucking idea why people get so defensive over Primal. Why wouldn’t people encourage them to decentralized? It would be good for Primal (doesn’t make them a future legal and intelligence target) and good for the Nostr ecosystem (preserves decentralization).

It’s cool! Be sure to turn off Web of Trust in Nostur settings. It allows people to engage in gamified blocking to censor peoples notifications and DMs on Nostr.

hvae you set a dark theme settings wide? I think it is respecting the system settings as to whether to be white on black vs black on white. In iPhone settings, dark mode is in Display and Brightness.

bro, choose the “Black and White" app theme. I guess that isn't really a good way to say “Dark mode” but it is literally white text on a black background.

you can just take your nsec to another client. That's the one thing that is great about Nostr identities. You are not locked in.

* Amethyst if you are worried about the state (has Tor builtin)
* Wisp if you aren’t and are on Android
* Damus Notedeck (best column reading UI for power users, like Tweedeck)
* Nostur.com (I mainly use this, coziest Apple experience)

Giving a decentralized rail protects Primal too longterm, because if Nostr ever gets traction courts and intelligence services will go after them demanding takedowns. Making it a neutral browser with an optional algorithmic feed would make them more like a network operator. Right now they’re an editorializing publisher.

It should be a clear choice, rather than mere opt-out. User launches Primal for the first time and is given two options “decentralized and censorship resistant” or “speedy algorithmic feed with low data usage for cellphone plans”. I’d be perfectly happy with that. I’ve said it a million times. But any suggestion that they change they not position themselves as a censor and point of centralization is met with a horde of aggressive shills. It makes no fucking sense at all unless they are incentivized somehow to defend Primal’s subversion of Nostr.

Primal should admit that their caching server is editorialized/moderated and not the decentralized protocol. People should have informed consent. Just let them know the difference. The caching server comes with positive elements too. It clearly uses less data, and for a lot of the world that matters a lot.

At this point you have to start asking — who the hell are Primal’s investors? Who is really calling the shots? Who is on its board?

Max Webster of Hivemind Ventures, for example, comes basically out of nowhere. He had an international solar energy (potentially a literal glownigger) company funded by Max Levchin, which just inches very closely to the surveillance economy and Peter Thiel’s Palantir. Then he was at Version One, a VC firm which was run by an a16z board member.

I’m not trying to personalize this, but I’ve never seen anything so ridiculously shilled on Nostr as this “Primal is decentralized” narrative. It makes no sense that it is pushed so aggressively and defended so hard. Do so many random small accounts have that much brand loyalty to one of many Nostr clients? Why wouldn’t they want it to be more, not less decentralized? Why would they be demanding that Primal be able to censor people. It makes way more sense that this is a paid PR strategy.

As far as I am concerned, using centralized services is no different than snitching at this point. This includes Primal.