Replies (120)
Above my pay grade but would like to see a proper discussion on this
zap to edit.
We don't need edits. Be a man and lean into the penis butter.
3 edits should be sufficient. I screw up a lot, and even I don't need that many edits.
That would kill my Index updates (linked to in my profile), but then again there is the new "Table of Contents" NIP get might fill the void. Hopefully the Table of Contents offers unlimited updatability.
They are editable on clients that support the feature. Namely Amethyst.
Couldn't agree more
Tbh hate Noatr edits
One of the βfeaturesβ that I enjoy about Nostr is the lack of editing and deleting notes (yes, you can delete if the client supports it but there are no guarantees it will be deleted). I think it makes interactions more authentic and more thought goes into notes because, like in real life, you have to take responsibility for what you say. You canβt just delete/edit and pretend it was never said.
There are several personalities on X or other legacy platforms that make tons of posts at the beginning of baseball season
βYankees will win it in 7β
βYankees will win it in 6β
βYankees will win it in 5β
And so on, for every single team. Then, they just delete all the posts for every prediction that doesnβt come true. Itβs a dirty game, this internet.
if it ain't worth a zap, it has no value
No edits or deletes, Nostr is real life and thereβs none of that in rl
I've trusted a fart before when I was sick. It was definitely a mistake.
It do.
No to edits. Just reply to clarify.
No
It already does
which NIP is it?
Honestly, why does it matter either way, what other people want, if it's not what you want? Can't people make nostr what they want & you guys not decide for them?
Never trust a part.
Can you imagine if everything you ever said remained in physical form for everyone to read, review and scrutinize, instead of only existing inside the memories of the few that heard you say it?
I'm glad I don't live in that universe.
Just donβt overthink it.
I just know it works with Amethyst and Ditto.pub
I'm on ditto, I can only delete & redraft π€
Yes, but developers also need to build something that doesn't hurt Nostr either. It's a balance.
Habla
The case against edits - fiatjaf
Read, Highlight, Write, Bookmark, Earn
Amethyst: 3 dot menu >Propose an Edit (or choose Request Deletion, which, technically if you are rapid, works to remove the note so you can start over with a new one)
This exists in Amethyst Drafts, and in long-form clients for long-form notes.
In Amethyst it'll save your drafts to your phone's local Citrine relay if you put Citrine's relay address in your "local" relay field in relay settings.
Lol I can't tell them what to do. They don't care what I think, and I can't blame them, because I don't think like anyone else.
This is how verbal communications work in real life. Verbal "notes" get instantly deleted.
Iβd also like to be able to delete stuff. Iβm allowed to change my mind, arenβt I?
Iβm with you here: things change, ideas change, tastes change. Imagine having to wear everything from your teens? Or be the person you were in your pre teens?
#yestr π«£π
For me, I see large text, scroll a little to the edited button once and see the original text.
I don't see how this is any worse than someone just spamming really large and random notes.
Not sure what edits have to do with it.
Fiatjaf can be very persuasive.
On the edit featureβitβs a good example of something users value. People are already paying for it, and it fits well with the idea that users, not centralized entities, should make decisions about their content.
Beyond that, there are so many ways Nostr could grow. Imagine features like markdown support, smart widgets, Taproot finance, global naming, censorship-resistant DNS, Git integration, and personal storage. These kinds of tools could make Nostr even more useful and flexible for developers and everyday users alike.
Nostr was designed to be a place where ideas could evolve quicklyβdifferent from Bitcoin, which thrives on stability. While some folks in the community are cautious about adding new features, itβs worth keeping an open mind. The right updates could make Nostr much more competitive without losing what makes it special.
In the age of LLM generated content I see typos as charming and authentic.
Each edit requires more and more POW?
This is a fair point and others have mentioned it too.
Smart, but easy to game. There's other ways for the user to mark the correct edit. Edit is actually the killer feature for nostr, if done right. Opens the door for whole new branches of innovation.
As a woman β¦ Iβm here for this. πππ
i like that nostr is like real life, unedited and you gotta come to terms with your mistakes
I'm firmly (and I mean FIRMLY) against the idea of restricting edits or deletion. Sure, taking back something you previously said is alright but if you have a lot of takes in the past that you don't want to keep online, you're going to look really bad.
Plus, it's a major privacy concern. I've made posts in the past that were before I learned the importance of privacy. If I couldn't delete them, I'd be keeping myself open to doxxing, not to mention potential embarrassment. Some posts people make can also damage their reputation. If they made a comment that was written in frustration (or even under the effects of exhaustion or alcohol), their entire reputation could be irreparably damaged if edits and deletion didn't exist. I mean, we see how easily people get canceled for comments they made years ago and forgot about, and society today tends to not accept apologies even when they're legitimate and genuine.
So yeah, no edits/deletion = no use for me. I like Nostr but if a basic function of user control and privacy isn't possible, I will not use it. It's objectively a bad thing and that's a Nostr hill I will die on.
lol
twitter never had edits but it had brands. Delete and repost works well enough.
Exactly ππ»
Some clients have an "undo" window of a couple seconds, so that's a good solution to "fix" typos. Some email clients have that too.
Hard agree. Also we're all about people owning their data. But they can't edit or delete it? Doesn't add up.
I think easily viewable edit history is probably the right balance on this?
I didnβt know that. Thank you!
BULLSHIT ON THE DEATH OF EDITS
View quoted note βInstead of max_amount go for max_time. Usually you'll spot typos right after you bash sent. If edits were only possible for X minutes that would be enough.
Edits X times within first X minutes. Most would edit after posting.
He convinced me without his antics the first time the debate was brought up, but I absolutely loved the way he showcases it π
I like edits too, I am also fine with annotations, I also like min number of edits, but I am convinced that we should not scream this feature into existence. It needs to be very well thought out.
Maybe a client will come up which will show us the right way to do this.
s = s.replace(/\w+/g,
function(w){return w[0].toUpperCase() + w.slice(1).toLowerCase();});
that's not even a typo but two languages π€£
you cunt do this!
Another view point. When you talk face to face to a person or a group of people, once you say something it canβt be edited or deleted. Although a face to face conversation flows at a much faster pace than typing a post online. Not having the ability to delete or edit may make people think more before pressing the send button. You have the time to do so.
I am still open minded about having edits / deletes.
Relays can decide
require PoW for edits. each edit needs a PoW larger than the previous one. Only the largest PoW will be kept. This will naturally limit edit numbers and reduce spam.
No edits, please :)
Iβve always said this is a good option, but Iβve only seen it implemented in two clients, and only one I use for specific purposes.
πππ
Yes, charming and authentic fingerprints
except you subhumans can't even be original in your typos
you all make exactly the same mistakes
mostly by misusing the apostrophe
it's not charming it's disgusting
NO EDITS, NO DELETES
Derek Ross
I like edits or at least the theory behind them. I make typos. I want to fix the typos. However,
@fiatjaf has convinced me that they're bad. His editing and the gamification of his edits are fun, but if hundreds of people in my feeds are doing this, then it would immediately degrade my experience. I would hate it. It would be annoying.
I now see edits as an attack vector and a performance degrader.
Maybe we need a maximum number of edits? 3? I don't know. I'm just thinking out loud.
Maybe we just do away with them altogether? π
Thoughts?
there is nothing to think about - we need edit history like wikipedia - you can edit as many times as you want - but every version is saved permanently.
i don't care what
@fiatjaf thinks about this. he disqualified himself from the position of being the supreme leader of NOSTR when he called for censorship.
there was ever only one person who understood what NOSTR is about and that is me.
Spelling mistakes and typoβs will decline in the long run with no editing.
Maybe just first and last.
I don't think they are more of an attack vector than regular notes, just unfollow npubs abusing them. One could also publish annoying gibberish as regular note, where is the difference?
Edits are often useful, you just really can rely on everyone seeing your root post also seeing the edits which makes them a bit confusing for users new to the Nostr concept.
3 lifetime edits, on the 4th your private key is revealed
What about time limited edits? You have a short window (5 mins or something) to correct annoying typos and then the ship has sailed. Probably a development nightmare.
how can one be at the same time for covenants and against edit?
Oh shhoiure. Juytsc letyy evrynd post udrreaxdble n(;nsensw. That wong cajze proldmz ay all.
Bless you're soul!
I'd ABSOLUTELY say no edits.
I think it's part of the ethos of Nostr--and a reminder that Nostr is different--it's about privacy, and freedom of speech. No edits are a part of that--
Just like in real life--once you say something, you don't get to pull it back. Yes, you can apologize but your words are forever.
So it is with Nostr.
Think before you speak--both IRL and on Nostr.
1 edit seems enough to me.
Edit: Iβve changed my opinion. There should be a hard fork. Nostr or Nostr Cash.
Thats wat im takin bout! π«
#NoEditGang
Who the fuck writes a technical post into a Kind 01? π We have replaceable notes, for good reason.
Edits should just be comments that get prioritized to the top of the feed.
I say, Yes to editing on the client layer, because typo. But, I say NO to edits on the protocol layer. There is a greater value to the protocol for the permanance of the notes than to a flexible note for the one user.
Here's my thought process and where I arrived:
I want to know that the post I'm looking at is the post that was placed, and the comments are about this version of it, and the repost are about this version of it. That's important to me as a community observer.
As a contributor, I want to fix my typos.
So, on those times that I look back and see a typo, it's usually right after I post it and before anyone has engaged with it. I just pop over to Nos.social, open the post. Copy the content. Delete the post. Go back to Primal, make sure it deleted, make the post anew with the typo fixed, and resubmit it for all to see without the typo.
That workflow could be provided by Primal. Primal could let me "edit" whereby my original post would be deleted and the new version would be submitted as a new post. After my edit is ready, Primal tells me it's about to request relay deletion of the original post and submit this new version of my post, to which I confirm. That ability could expire after 5 minutes or some short term useful time limit, at the client level.
But, I as the user am not inclined to do that anyway after someone has engaged with it. I'm more likely to just post a comment with the whole "I mean *typo." if it's even worth it. This is the case because the note's consistency after engagement is more valuable to the community than my ability to fix the typo is to me.
This suggested functionality on Primal or any client is my ideal workflow on the protocol, while preserving the important features yet accommodating the necessary one for user experience.
Your replica was interesting to read! It may make sense to be permissive to this, within the protocol.
A passing conversation isn't a permanent record, though. Aside from memory, it's not stored ad infinitum. Moreover, if abuse/harassment occurs, such as the canceling thing, it boils down to hearsay.
None of that is even remotely true without edits and deletion.
Transparency for governments, corporations, money and software. Privacy for the people.
I hate reading a note, to which I wrote a word wrong or for some reason, I βateβ a letter. So, editing would be valuable - and I wish it was possible to see this tool acting on @primal; my favorite client. I donβt know the size of the impact that this would cause, but for sure, a test in practice could be done; and if it is found that it is bad, excluded later.
No edits is the literal OPPOSITE of privacy and freedom of speech, what are you talking about?
Finally. A sensible idea.
This is perfect. It matches my perceived use case precisely and allows the client to accommodate my need with zero compromise to the quality of the content across the relay network.
@fiatjaf , is NIP37 usable right now? If so, I can turn my attention to
@primal for adoption. π
Scary thing is, my brain made it easy for me to read that π
If NIP37 is already a thing, then it looks like fiatjaf and others have already brought a solve for the clients to leverage. π€
We had this debate years ago on the Steemit blockchain... There's what I believe to be a very simple solution.
Initially, Steemit allowed editing for typos and second thoughts for a brief span (~10 minutes?) after posting.
As an author, I wanted complete control in perpetuity over my work, and fought for that outcome tirelessly.
The final solution?π€
Versioning. Each new edit is saved as a serialized version of the original post. Anyone seeking the "truth" about the ugly, typo-ridden original is welcome to dig back to ground zero, as nothing is deleted, while serious authors can fix typos they may have missed years later.π
Your argument is also well accepted. I always usually read before multiplying something! Sometimes, it goes unnoticed wrong writings or missing a letter - since I use the cell phone as a transmitter; this gives me a lot of anguish.
Easy to put this on the client layer leveraging NIP37 as fiatjaf pointed out. People can do what they want, in the end, but as a client you don't necessarily want to cause people to change a note substantively that has seen significant engagement. So accommodating a quick typo fix is the ideal here.
NIP37 would resolve this. Most quick edits of typos won't be substantive and would already be top-of-feed, so you're right in both cases.
Your post needs some serious NIP37.
Your comment is well thought out. Look at NIP37 that fiatjaf linked to in his comment to my note and see if that allows your usage without compromising the protocol. It seems to. I think it may be the answer for clients to leverage.
I'm in your camp. See any issues with the NIP37 that fiatjaf linked to?
ChatGPT are releasing a new model with
more typos. Youll never no. π€£
I rest my case π
Being able to edit the ledger of what has been said is never a good idea.
Good points. Thank you. I do think that more thought before posting would be a good idea for many. Absolutely agree, Privacy for the people.
Great insight. I like both, but for different purposes. At a protocol level it's oft best to accommodate client desires openly and flexibly and simply. Do you see a fiatjaf describes Nip37 as offering the best of both worlds to the clients/relays on how they choose to handle it, with the end goal keeping a simple flexible protocol? Clients need flex to accommodate infinite use cases. That's the tough job of a protocol.
Yeah, no kidding. π€·π»ββοΈ
All I know is I won't be implementing edits in any of my clients Β―\_(γ)_/Β―
An edit mechanism that creates a new note that supersedes the original, while leaving that original intact, would be ideal. We all speak thumb.
@Derek Ross Thinking without edits sharpens clarity and intention. The discipline shapes better ideas upfront.
Please, which clients?
Nostur (current iOS client) and Plebstr (defunct).
Thanks!
To be clarify, when I say βauthenticβ I donβt mean from a technical standpoint, but point very much taken.
Thinking more like grammar police that correct there, their, theyβre
only buybiby choice ya/bye(^_^)
But "no edit"???
I think that is the edit answer. Allows the edit with chain of changes, or delete replace, depending on how the relay wants to handle it. Backward-compatible, accommodate simple fixes, or in a system that wants to be a mini GitHub for every post they can, use nip 37 to do that on their client relays. This is how I understand it as put forward. Just a matter of getting the clients to onboard it. See my other mock ups for Primal to adopt.
Think about it--when you talk to someone you can never "take back" the words you've said....
Same with email...once you've sent it, you can't really pull it back...
If you want to edit your message, do it before you hit send...
Edits could be fine... If you can also go and see the original note.
That permanence will add a lot of historic value years down the road even for something as silly as a typo.
The hardness of our words is important to me. We are etching our notes into digital stone.
You can see the edits. All several hundred of them.
Amor π me dijo mi hermano
