The "it's no different from Twitter" is a gross overstatement, though I do sympathize with Will's view. I certainly prefer to select the relays I read from and have the client I am using pull notes from those relays directly. That said, I also understand Primal's choice to use a caching relay for the sake of optimizing for new users who barely understand what a relay is, let alone how to select ones that will achieve their goals. New users don't yet HAVE goals they want to accomplish in their selection of relays. On Twitter, you don't own your identity. On Nostr, you absolutely do, even on Primal. Yes, Primal COULD put fake notes that appear to be from your npub, but the fact that they weren't actually signed by your nsec would be immediately apparent when they cannot be accessed from any other client, and cannot be rebroadcast out to any other relays. On Twitter, you cannot post your tweets to any server other than Twitter's centralized server. On Primal, you absolutely still can maintain your censorship resistance by posting to multiple relays, because relays reject notes that aren't signed by the correct private key. On Twitter, you can only read tweets that were posted to their centralized server. On Primal, you may only be able to read from their caching relay, BUT those aren't just posts that were written TO their relay. You are still seeing posts that were originally written to a wide variety of relays. On Twitter, you are a slave to their proprietary algorithm. On Primal, you get to choose your algorithm, or create one that suits your own needs. Now, do I think this is ideal to only read from a caching relay? Absolutely not. Do I think Will has a lot of good points about why this is a compromise of Nostr's values? Yes, I do. But it's not "no different from Twitter" by a long shot.