I’m not sure what the big deal is here. The US military has had swarm tech like this for almost a decade through DARPA performing mapping and scouting missions

I am also going to say that nostr has all these things in some alpha form or another. However, it is very much a mess right now and it is harder IMHO to connect with others or curate my feed with stuff I like.

The advantage of small groups and fedi is starting with a small network and growing it slowly, this is more rewarding than starting with the whole world and trying to pull back.

Nostr might have all the features but its a mess right now

Same. Tried it a few years ago and it was bloatware and cluttered. Took another chance on it and really like it, super fast and I can make it as full featured or slim down as I want. I think the company is owned by the workers if I remember correctly. Double check that

Fair point, I thought about that too but if it were me and my reputation on the line, I’d make a main point of the video. Just as gamer nexus did.

Making a vid about being less careless and then being careless.

All that said, when I was posting vids, there was a full screen YouTube made me go through to set monitization and ad placement before proceeding to a separate screen for posting

Did any one see the pinned comment where they say turned off monetization after community feedback? as if this video should be monitized in the first place lol man this does not feel right

I agree. There is a potential barrier to entry, and growth. I argue:

• people part with money for a cause or belief. Culturally privacy apps are different, inconvenient and unfamiliar UX, there are usually no ‘email signups’, not run by ads, or sales of data, and the software is free but has a learning curve. People do it anyways because they believe it is right
• Its not unusual to pay $1-$15 for an app in a mobile app store. At least they can get their money back (it’s actually free to use)
• users can be compensated for ‘rich’ abusive actor, at the same time incentivised to report in the case of ie chat app
• A sponsor couls risk their collatoral to allow access to a user who cannot manage the initial financial barrier

The first point is the most important IMHO, privacy users accept the learning curve and inconvenience because they believe privacy is more important and because of this, I believe the burden is not as high as we think, that a ‘free to play’ alternative means of accessing privacy respecting apps (by this idea or something else) is as as essential to supporting and protecting privacy as E2EE vs server side encryption.

I believe financial consequences can be very useful to make it expensive to spam or be abusive.

For example, for a user to access an app:

• The user is required to put up X amount of money as colatoral
• The user can retrieve the funds if they choose to discontinue use of the app
• If a user is reported for abuse, a small fine is deducted from their colatoral

The user Reputation and distribution of fines:

• if a user, has multiple accounts in good standing, the initial collateral to access new apps is discounted for good reputation.
• The proceeds from fines can be distributed to the app’s treasury or to users with good rep.

Yeah… Thought they were monitoring angels

The points in this article have nothing to do with the actual browser. For the record I use Firefox, librewolf, and brave

Some sites are broken with a Firefox base.

• the founder is controversial. so what? Does the product render pages with pretty good fingerprint blocking? Yes

• crypto exchanges are under scrutiny and brave uses crypto. so what? does the product render pages with decent cross tracking isolation? Yes

• their crypto has little value and was a failed experiment so what? Does the browser remove ads? Yes

If you’re going to write about how something sucks, talk about it with substance, point out code that does XYZ to confirm negative statements.