-
@ Constant
2025-06-10 10:01:24The objective web represents how we currently experience internet platforms. It functions primarily through centralized instances or platforms delivering shared information and statuses. These centralized platforms produce coherent views of reality based on standardized metrics such as trending content, view counts, likes, and aggregated user comments. This framework creates a single shared, authoritative depiction of the world, leading people to consume a shared interpretation of events. The objective web, therefore, becomes a centralized authority or source of truth, determining what is relevant, credible, and noteworthy. The presentation of a singular standard can also be extrapolated to concepts like Google's search rankings, user ratings on Uber, or Wikipedia's attempt at an objective encyclopedia. Though they differ in rigidity, each of these structures tries to deliver a consensus version of reality. Note that the argument is not that these platforms are objective, but they beget de facto objectivity, simply as a result of everyone deferring their subjectivity to the same entity.
This singular, consistency-based approach is increasingly failing. The objective web is under severe strain as diverse groups increasingly disagree about policies, representation, truth claims, and even basic shared facts. These difficulties become glaringly evident when considering disruptive technological changes, especially artificial intelligence-generated content and bots. The ability of platforms to consistently moderate and curate trustworthy information for all users quickly diminishes. The nature of centralized authorities means they're facing dedicated, scalable attacks. This creates an environment saturated with distrust and compromise. This approach is inherently unstable and is gradually collapsing amid internal contradictions and external pressures.
In sharp contrast, Nostr proposes the subjective web. The subjective web decouples individuals from standardized, centralized interpretive structures. Rather than relying on platforms or centralized systems to filter and interpret 'the internet', people individually decide how to interpret and judge the information and content they're exposed to. Subjectivity here is about personal judgment, local decision-making, and contextually flexible interpretations rather than universal coherence. This approach shifts the interpretative responsibility away from centralized authorities or algorithms and onto individuals and their personal networks.
This subjectivity is not limited to content but extends to the personal methods of interpreting information and people, using any variety of tools available—including algorithmic analysis, AI interpretation, or simple social-relationship analyses. In doing so, the subjective web becomes far tougher for malicious actors to compromise because attacks must be tailored to unique personal environments and rely upon infiltrating individual interpretations and decision-processes. In other words, infiltration tactics that might be successful on a centralized system become incredibly difficult when everyone is forming their own subjective reality.
Subjective realities are robust against generalized or mass attacks due to their inherently private and personalized nature. To effectively corrupt or hack these subjective webs, attackers must conduct sophisticated infiltration attacks tailored to each user specifically. Even then, attackers face significant obstacles in gathering precise information about a user's personal judgment process and inner interpretations, which remain fundamentally private and contextual. Users can easily retreat into their own trusted, locally built social circles or community ties, rather than having their trust networks limited to centralized authority structures.
This resilience relies on leveraging "webs of trust"—interconnected user relationships based on personal experiences and connections formed in the real world, rather than purely online interactions. This brings an important point: the subjective web fundamentally grounds trust on physical experience, minimizing large-scale vulnerabilities. Users maintain independent trust networks built through real-world interactions and institutions such as churches, sports-clubs, local community groups etc.. While these connections remain scalable and somewhat institutionally structured, they're significantly less susceptible to widespread digital manipulation and infiltrations. Additionally, since these trust webs are numerous, diversified, and individually tailored, single points of centralized failure are rare, and users can reconstruct trust if compromised.
Another significant is timestamping. Timestamping content offers a fundamental layer of objective verification within subjective systems, preventing after-the-fact manipulation. When timestamping is properly implemented, retrospective attacks (i.e., creating detailed fake environments designed to fool a person once that user is already engaging a particular environment) become practically impossible. For effective infiltration, attackers need established identities with consistent historical proof—meaning maintaining long-standing fraudulent identities across long periods—something more costly to scale in terms of effort, resources, and commitment.
While the subjective web represents a fundamentally decentralized and resilient structure, users naturally desire objective anchoring points at times. Users can incorporate ‘objective’ points but do so as part of a broader array of personalized, contextual interpretations rather than centrally imposed, universally agreed-upon concepts. Thus, objective systems in the subjective web landscape exist merely as subjective information sources rather than authoritative interpretations. The difference here lies in acknowledging their inherent subjectivity, rather than attempting to impose a façade of universal, authoritative objectivity.
The subjective web isn't merely a theoretical ideal or preference—it represents an unavoidable future. Signs already suggest the current centralized, authoritative, coherence-driven internet model is fundamentally crumbling, torn apart by emerging contradictions, trust collapses, polarization, disagreements, and attacks. Centralized authorities increasingly limit openness or transparency as defense mechanisms, fundamentally compromising the advantages that made the internet powerful in the first place.
By contrast, transitioning toward a subjective web reduces these dilemmas and opens spaces of autonomy and interpretations suited to diverse and individual user needs. Unlike centralized systems, subjective webs limit the risks of digital manipulation, mass misinformation campaigns, censorship, narrative control, and network lockdown. Each individual retains robust networks of trust and personal interpretations, inherently preventing large-scale coordinated misinformation campaigns simply by maintaining diversity and individuality.
Embracing subjective web approaches with Nostr naturally offers a practical, resilient way forward as centralized platforms collapse under their own contradictions. Subjective webs inherently maintain the openness of early internet freedom while also offering individuals trustworthy, personalized interpretative environments. Ultimately, the collapse of objective web coherent structures may be inevitable. In recognizing this inevitability, embracing decentralized, individual-focused subjective web systems represents a practical method to reassert personal autonomy, interpretation freedom, resilience against manipulation, scalable infiltration attacks, centralized censorship attempts, and trust compromises.