I think listening to the episode made me more sceptical of W...

d1a61498f4b1dc26...

npub16xnpfx85k8wzdhctang6860g3u64lds5kac73ddjwlg0lxdg9g3su56z6l

hex

c6b59585932e9e803967cc173159c8eee6200e087cc5b38420e365d45ef293ff

nevent

nevent1qqsvddv4skfja85q89nuc9e3t8ywae3qpcy8e3dnssswxew5tmef8lcprpmhxue69uhhyetvv9ujuem4d36kwatvw5hx6mm9qgsdrfs5nr6trhpxmu97e5dra85g7d2lkc2twu0gkke8058lnx5z5gc32udc4

Kind-1 (TextNote)

2026-03-05T17:26:55Z

↳ Reply to ff18165a... (npub1luvpvkhauqy994y6fcf3djvpc7hszexpsyxqhs87g8fkrhtu5lcqylnmt5)

Hope this episode helped to explain the WoT concept, it’s definitely legit

I think listening to the episode made me more sceptical of WoT.

When discussing what problem would be solved by WoT, he (I forget which one is which) says around 1:24:20

"... it would solve the problem of like what to pay attention to because it would automatically rank all the good stuff from your communities and down-rank all the bad stuff ..."

This sounds at the same time a bit naive and also a bit Orwellian.

I mean "what to pay attention to" and distinguishing "good stuff" from "bad stuff" sound like major life questions, the sort of thing one might want to spend a few years studying philosophy, literature or science for, or maybe go travelling the world or something.

I can see how one might be attracted to the idea to get these questions resolved by an algorithm, but the project seems a bit chimerical.

In fairness, he might have just meant something much more mundane, like filtering out completely obvious spam, but I was struck by the way he put it.

Raw JSON

{
  "kind": 1,
  "id": "c6b59585932e9e803967cc173159c8eee6200e087cc5b38420e365d45ef293ff",
  "pubkey": "d1a61498f4b1dc26df0becd1a3e9e88f355fb614b771e8b5b277d0ff99a82a23",
  "created_at": 1772731615,
  "tags": [
    [
      "e",
      "8339068543dc39642023ee5af73e18c4a15e728f629b2dfb2e59621064707578",
      "wss://relay.damus.io/",
      "root",
      "ff18165afde00852d49a4e1316c981c7af0164c1810c0bc0fe41d361dd7ca7f0"
    ],
    [
      "e",
      "99c9fdfd44db6ab93f1603d3d0b7de8bfade4faee84fce6f686e2821cf10570d",
      "wss://nostr.land/",
      "reply",
      "ff18165afde00852d49a4e1316c981c7af0164c1810c0bc0fe41d361dd7ca7f0"
    ],
    [
      "p",
      "e5272de914bd301755c439b88e6959a43c9d2664831f093c51e9c799a16a102f"
    ],
    [
      "p",
      "ff18165afde00852d49a4e1316c981c7af0164c1810c0bc0fe41d361dd7ca7f0"
    ]
  ],
  "content": "I think listening to the episode made me more sceptical of WoT.\n\nWhen discussing what problem would be solved by WoT, he (I forget which one is which) says around 1:24:20 \n\n\"... it would solve the problem of like what to pay attention to because it would automatically rank all the good stuff from your communities and down-rank all the bad stuff ...\"\n\nThis sounds at the same time a bit naive and also a bit Orwellian.\n\nI mean \"what to pay attention to\" and distinguishing \"good stuff\" from \"bad stuff\" sound like major life questions, the sort of thing one might want to spend a few years studying philosophy, literature or science for, or maybe go travelling the world or something.\n\nI can see how one might be attracted to the idea to get these questions resolved by an algorithm, but the project seems a bit chimerical.\n\nIn fairness, he might have just meant something much more mundane, like filtering out completely obvious spam, but I was struck by the way he put it.",
  "sig": "f544983b264865214ac4939989cbe8d780a7ee590f652c61bc300ded985b5561cc48fe5d5c5a6c2980453c721788a97a342251d961e3c08bbc190cc7a09e5c04"
}