There is - https://flotilla.social/

Yes. Here are some specifications that describe it: https://github.com/nostr-protocol/nips/blob/master/17.md and https://github.com/nostr-protocol/nips/blob/master/59.md

So if a user is banned from their PDS and they haven't backed up their keys, the community is screwed? That seems like a pretty big flaw.

Yep!

People in the Bitcoin space have been screaming at the top of their lungs about this for decades at this point, but it's hard to work against the marketing machine that comes from these ICOs.

Is there anything wrong with this article?

I think it would be better if you actually engaged with the article and articulated any criticism you have with it instead of just writing things off because I like other solutions to decentralized social media more.

You didn't engage in good faith last time. As I mentioned then, this would effect your future interactions. Welcome to that moment.

I did, we just have different views of what decentralized means.

we don't get to judge ourselves

"Blowing out someone else’s candle doesn’t make yours shine any brighter."

On the other hand, shining a light on things that are not what they seem is very good, which is what I tried to do.

how you do or say that matters, so we come full circle, and we see again you are not interested in learning or adjusting

Perhaps having a conversation with the folks from Protocol Labs would be helpful for you. They being from the blockchain ecosystem, and likely adopting atproto for a new project, will likely have some interesting perspectives for you.

https://discourse.atprotocol.community/t/hypercerts-recogniz...

One way to combat this would be to force users to stake something. Pay 10 bucks to your account and if you misbehave by spamming or posting only AI slop, you lose it. Brings with it other problems, of course.

There's stacker.news - of course centred on Bitcoin discussion - that works on this principle. Posting and upvoting are actual microtransactions.

That's a nonsense idea because it fails to define how low-quality undeclared slop (LQUS) can accurately even be classified. Also, if money is on the line, it will be taken away even when the article is not LQUS.

I agree, but there is a slight alteration of the proposal which could work rather well. Pay $10 to get in, but no change to the procedures by which your account is revoked. This puts a price on sock puppets, while almost any legitimate, normal user only wants one account, and gets it for a trivial fee. This may also relax the pressure to monetize through ads, which could have perks.

Yep! This pretty much!

Bitcoin via the Lightning Network is near cost-free and instant. And it's not a hack, it's just a network of payment channels.

The lightning network is a joke and always has been. It was never going to work and the creator has been open about that from day one.

Only question is, if Elizabeth Stark knows it's unworkable slop why does she keep raising money for it???

Because centralization matters. It is what stops a hostile agent from ruining things. There is no real win in being "semi-decentralized".

I am, I just don’t have the same values in terms of what I want from my decentralized social media.

Saying you do does not change what others see across your comments. I'd suggest reading the HN guidelines again. I do myself from time to time because there is some good internet decorum wisdoms in there. I hope by reading them, you can see your comments more like how we see them.

VCs have put in $120 million, so someone thinks that it's worth something.