Thread

It may depend on the legal definition of service or platform. But we all know what their goal is. It seems that normies would have to have an epiphany before leaving facebook where their entire social network exists now. I think until they successfully block tor (a tool they themselves use) or until mass adoption, nostr will be in a grey area where they claim authority to regulate jt but take no action in doing so. They will only use it for malicious enforcement.

It's why everyone should use nostr:nprofile1qqs83nn04fezvsu89p8xg7axjwye2u67errat3dx2um725fs7qnrqlgzqtdq0

I am guessing Primal is a pretty centralised (has a face) target.

Nostr clients don't store any data, so technically they are not a service and are exempt from this law. Nostr relays have no capability to show the information, they are more like a glorified google drive, and therefore are exempt from this law. I am no lawyer and why I wrote above may well be bullshit. But I think that because of it's unique architecture, Nostr will fly free.

Nostr relays show the information to nostr clients. Normal web servers are glorified Google drive as well, storing and retrieving web pages, and yet this law would be pointless if it didn't apply to them. Access to Nostr will always be possible to affect with legislation. Nostr has no special ability to protect itself in that particular respect.

Digital ID laws have an unfortunate loophole called the "meeting someone in person" loophole. The government allows people to meet and talk in person without ever showing eachother their IDs. I hope they patch this gaping hole soon, think of all the awful things that could happen if people are meeting in person without showing ID!

Prison Island gonna Prison.

Chrome is not part of the regulation, providers and services are. Hence a nostr client would not be, however a relay could potentially be.

If we are talking about a desktop client then I agree with you. However I have heard Nostr users claim that web clients also aren't subject to content regulations, but I don't think I buy that. I think websites are legally responsible for the content that they make available through embedding it in their web page. Yes, TECHNICALLY the code that requests notes is Javascript that's being run in the user's browser, not on the Nostr web client's server, (at least that's the case for many Nostr web clients) and TECHNICALLY the notes are being sent directly to the client's IP address rather than to the Nostr web client's server IP. (Again, I'm talking about many Nostr web clients.) However, the Nostr web clients are still the ones connecting users to relays and providing their browsers with the means to interpret that connection. And they are doing it all without verifying the age of the user. If the state has a problem with a website giving minors access to porn, they probably don't care much whether that porn is stored on the website's own server or someone else's. They don't care about HOW the website is giving minors access to porn, they only care THAT the website is granting minors access and that the URL at the top of the screen says you are on the same website.