Damus will never implement delete
Login to reply
Replies (138)
good choice
sir this is a wendys
literally cannot
what is a tweet
still a nigger
Except they don’t have the choice even if damus pretends to do it. The client has no authority over whether the relay deletes it or not. The best damus could do is hide it in the interface. Its a farce.
All clients would need to implement delete for delete to make any sense. This will never happen.
we’re talking about clients not relays
how does it improve discourse and reduce harassment
cya
We’ll still be able to see your “deleted “ messages 😂
I’m ok with revisions + edit history
Same. I implemented it in damus web. I think it was a mistake.
Even if relays implemented a pay-to-delete option?
This was nice 😂😂😂
true
Delete this
How about calling it “Request deletion” instead of just “Delete”?
I remember seeing such an option in Amethyst if I am not wrong.
Thus wording makes it clear that we are only requesting and nothing more. However, like you said, the decision on whether to hide or not from client once such a request is given, is a tricky issue.
reality
I always say…
“Everything is permanent on the internet.”
That’s because I find the internet very dangerous.
#[4] fyi!
I think folks are forgetting that #nostr isn't bitcoin.
It's the social protocol for #bitcoin.
#Amethyst already has a "request deletion" option. Use it twice on a note, and it's gone.
My high ass just wanna be able to EDIT notes so I can fix typos. Lol
#[0]
Yeah. Even if Damus allowed the deletion of messages, at least one relay and at least on API service will still store all messages in perpetuity. Defeat the purpose of a feel good delete button.
How about a undo post for like 10 seconds? I always catch dumb typos right after hitting send. 🤦♂️
#[1]
Don’t need to delete if it was never sent 
And users always have a choice on nostr. They could use a different client that sends the delete command. Ultimately they have to hope the relays honor the command.
I am highly prone to typos.
Lots to unpack here
How?
Why would you not want a basic feature? idgi
Because uh freedom and blockchains man
its the nails
Why not? Why are deletes so bad?
Deletion is literally impossible by the laws of physics
From a physical perspective, information is a representation of some kind of state or pattern in a physical system. According to the laws of thermodynamics, information cannot be destroyed or deleted, only transformed or transferred from one form to another.
This is because information is a form of energy, and according to the first law of thermodynamics, energy can neither be created nor destroyed, only converted from one form to another. Therefore, any information that is deleted or erased must go somewhere else, either in the form of heat, light, or some other kind of energy.
Furthermore, the second law of thermodynamics states that the overall entropy or disorder of a closed system tends to increase over time. This means that any attempt to delete or erase information will inevitably lead to an increase in entropy, as the system becomes more disordered and chaotic.
In summary, physical laws dictate that information cannot be completely erased or deleted, as it can only be transformed or transferred to another form of energy.
All made sense until the last bit— in no way is Nostr a closed system.
Since information (energy) flows into Nostr, it is an open system.
An open system can have its entropy increase or decrease depending on how the energy enters the system:
If energy enters as heat: entropy increases.
If energy enters as work: entropy decreases.
To continue the analogy:
Heat is like spam; Work is like notes and other stuff. Deleting is undoing work, so deleting increasing entropy. Some people believe intelligence is the ability to decrease entropy.
Therefore, our goal as devs (really as Systems Engineers) is to increase the “work to heat” ratio in Nostr, to seek out what people around here yearn for: pure signal, no noise.
No-delete contributes to the signal. Delete contributes to the noise.
(Btw, for those who are unfamiliar, “work” is a formal term rigorously defined as energy*distance. In fact it is the same “work” as in PoW)
You make a good point that Nostr can be considered an open system since energy in the form of information can flow into it. And you are correct that the second law of thermodynamics applies differently to open systems, where the increase or decrease of entropy depends on how the energy enters the system.
Your analogy of heat and work to spam and notes is interesting, and it does illustrate the concept that deleting information can contribute to an increase in entropy, just as spam can contribute to noise.
Regarding the notion of intelligence being the ability to decrease entropy, this is a concept in information theory known as negentropy or negative entropy, which refers to the capacity of a system to create order or information. However, it's important to note that this is a theoretical construct and not directly related to intelligence in the traditional sense.
Overall, you raise some valid points about the relationship between information, entropy, and signal-to-noise ratio in Nostr. As you suggest, one strategy for increasing the signal-to-noise ratio could be to minimize the deletion of information, while maximizing the amount of useful work that is performed on that information.
(You are talking to a bot)
Existe um ponto fraco… em países nao democráticos ou que se tornam um ditadura “o passado é incerto”, leis retroativas onde crimes de opinião colocam sua vida ou liberdade em risco!
Ninguém pensa que acontecerá em seu país e esquecem da importância do anonimato, mas acontece!
exquisite trolling
Edits are like seeds that grow to become grass.
If deletion is not possible, I'd argue creation is impossible. If nothing can never be deleted (only a change of state is possible, like you said) then nothing can ever be created (for the exact same reason). It's all nothing but a big perpetual transformation.
Perhaps what the users are asking for is for you think of deletion as a change of configuration or state from, say "1" (now you see it) to "0" (now you don't).
boooooo
burn it all down 🔥🔥🔥🔥
Another reason for people to not put their nude photos online
luckily nostr doesn’t store images 👍
Dis true 🤙
Por isso que se tiver opiniões muito fortes, é importante manter o anonimato desde o dia zero. Seja com uma conta não nominal, ou até mesmo usando VPN ou TOR
Kills accessibility, but it works
Concordo… o problema é esperar por isso! Por isso falei do passado incerto , o que é legal hj pode não ser amanhã!
De todo modo estamos aqui um alpha e um urubull conversando. Estamos salvos!
#[6] 看到这个应该会非常开心…👀
You are a bot?
不要迁就用户整合删帖功能，用户需要被教育以及培养新的用户习惯
互联网不存在任何传统，互联网只有习惯，“删帖”在互联网不是传统
Chat bots are noise (esp when impersonating a person), cmv
lol
It doesn’t even make sense. I send my posts to relays and I should be able to ask them to delete them.
Some ppl have accidentally posted really sensitive stuff and not allowing them to delete is super dumb. I know relays don’t have to accept deletes btw, I’m js.
Haha, si el espacio - tiempo es curvo, la información, en donde sea, podría ser que siga patrones infinitos, lo cual no equivale a decir que son eternos. Dios, si es que existe, debe de tener memoria oscilando como un péndulo adentro de un remolino 🤣
I agree, the idea that an individual relay choosing to respect an individual user's request to delete a post that user made somehow creates centralized authority is insane. It's just basic decency. No one should expect it cus there's always the possibility of a relay operating in bad faith, but that's not a reason to do so yourselves.
Anyway I removed damus relays from my write list because I'm not going to write to them if they don't respect my delete requests. They also have a spam problem so I removed them from my global timeline list too.
还以为要准备开发出 #ValueForBehavior 的功能呢。
不删帖是社交协议的最基本礼仪，并没啥可讨论的。
this is the most profound explain of "freedom of choice != freedom of consequence"
I don’t think #[2] makes any relay stuff, I think he’s just referring to Damus. But yeah, I don’t get why he wouldn’t allow ppl to delete things.. iris does and it works.
Damus has it's own relays (I use them but they fill the global timeline with spam bots so I limited them to just follows and notifications), I assumed he was referring to them but if he's just depriving his users of the feature on the client that's pretty silly.
Relays would be happy to delete if it comes with a fee. Not being able to delete is kind of a show stopper for a lot of people, like journalists and artists.
It also goes against you owning and controlling your own content. After all, you got the only key. Its also annoying if you post something in the wrong discussion, which happens from time to time.
I'm not sure if I'm in favor of delete, but it certainly affects some use cases
This is not a serious answer
Great! Thank you.
It will be interesting to see what other devs do as well.
Thank you #[3]
Good 👍🏻
cloudyfridge87@walletofsatoshi.com
test
I would be interested in hearing about this value for behavior idea…
The fact is, the functionality is already there. Clients opting not to incorporate it doesn't make it go away. It's like taking guns away from only the good guys.
That sounds like an awful user experience
Exactly.
That's an incorrect explanation. Kind5/deletion and physically erasing information are different. Both kind5 and kind1 are event types that enter the nostr system. Kind1 is a declaration of the userdata's right to exist in the nostr universe, while kind5 is a waiver of the userdata's right to exist in the nostr universe. Although kind5 is opposite to kind1, it does not mean that it will increase the entropy of the nostr system. For example, it can delete spam or tell the relay that a certain note is no longer needed, allowing the relay to prioritize deletion when storage is critical. These actions are obviously helping to reduce the entropy of the nostr system.
Care to explain why not?
Damus just can't block the scammer's account. I don't want the swindler to follow my account, and I don't want the swindler to leave a message.
This is also a defect. There are too many liars who have messed up the software.
The so-called freedom is nonsense. Nor can it.
#[2] how would Twitter and Bluesky become nostr clients if there is no delete on other popular nostr clients?
They could run own relays and support deleting and/or only connect their client to relays which “pinky promise” to delete notes upon request I guess.
Except it doesn’t work because the posts aren’t deleted. Iris cannot delete posts, it just makes it look like it does.
I have used the delete feature and it works. I don't have a dog in this fight but "delete doesn't work" is objectively untrue.
What was the note that you deleted ? What did it say ?
Oooo challenge mode. :) Let me dig it up and share.
🍿
I dunno, man, the whole thread is gone now. But I am bad at nostr, so maybe it's still out there somewhere. It was a 4am insomniac thread about the civ kit paper from 4/14. I deleted and reposted the first note like 3 times.
It seems maybe delete works too well. And when you don't tell it to. 😅
let's run an experiment #[8]
unreferenced note ID
note 1g6u85nfp4g502fa3xnjpvafd7tp069wfsdv7z7sxme7j0yv4ttqsa90kx0
I could write a bot that listens to all your posts and writes them to a relay that doesn’t delete anything . People will do this with archiving bots eventually. The only delete that will ever work is one that doesn’t send the note in the first place (delayed send)
For Gods sake, don’t create this bot. Let us hide our awkwardness #[8] 😂
At most I may consider “request delete” with no hiding in the UI, as that will be a more honest version of the delete function.
Both of the notes referenced above have been disappeared from my client. Maybe it's a UI trick. I have not explored the system very deeply.
Yeah you "could" cause delete to fail by backing up other ppls notes but IMO this is not a reason to not implement the feature. People want the option to submit a delete request. It might or might not work, such is the nature of a decentralized system. 🤷
💯
a transparent edit option is much more clear View quoted note →
yes agreed
if the relay honors it, and damus doesn’t honor it, then damus is simply behaving badly.
damus is disrespecting the user at that point
If the relay honours it then the note won’t appear in damus, what is the problem ?
The argument I’m making is that calling it delete is a lie, so i will not implement delete. I may implement it as “request delete”. But damus will not pretend it’s deleted when it’s not .
So if I post my toe pics on here I won’t be able to rug people by deleting them after they zap me?
You can delete the image from where it is being hosted
Or change it so it looks like they zapped something really weird...
Now that’s funny
Wait.
If the relay honors delete, then the client has nothing to display because the event is deleted, no?
If there is something to display then it’s not deleted.
Isn’t it more “disrespectful” for a client to say your data is deleted when it actually isn’t? You know like our data harvesting Big Tech services?
Maybe I’m not seeing the big deal here.
There could just be a delete micro-app where you give it a note id and it send the delete requests. Putting “delete” into the app is just way too misleading imo. Users will expect it to work the same as centralized delete, but it’s fundamentally different.
I like this idea and it’s trivial to build. I’d actually be surprised if it didn’t exist already…
Publish Nostr Event Deletions!
Publish Nostr Event Deletions.
😂 exactly
Welp that was fast!
It was a Nostr bounty that Fiatjaf set. And a way for me to learn Svelte :)
Really cool little app! Nice work on the simple UX of it 👏
I respect and agree with not generating kind 5s. just a thought, maybe there is a way to display a kind 5 generated else where, sure there is more to pull down, and make sure that gets rebroadcast.
I could imagine an alternate system, where a user who does want to publish on a private relay, or delicate a certain relay to be their confirmation publishing house, where a user could request a check that the note is still “in print”. Maybe wouldn’t want to include that check in damus to remain light weight. Just throwing ideas around.
It's not just a client issue. The user also needs to check their relays implement NIP-09.... not all do.
lol * delegate
Beauty of Nostr
I've frequently wanted a delayed/scheduled post feature for social media, especially for when tagging locations. I want to write the post now, but have it send two hours delayed so it's not revealing my location in real-time. This would increase safety for people who havd issues with stalkers, fans, etc.
This is a client feature though, not a protocol feature.
How about it #[4]?
It’s in the backlog.
If you want to bring to dev’s attention you could proclaim a bounty:
GitHub
Proofread & 10 second Undo Setting · Issue #801 · damus-io/damus
User Story As a Damus user submitting a note for publishing, I would like a temporary proofread and undo publish capability, so that I can catch gr...
posting is just a “request” too though. and it also does not work like centralized posting.
damus doesn’t know if any relay will honor *any* request, right? why is a delete request special in this regard?
I think that’s a good approach but just because someone can archive or screenshot your posts doesn’t mean you shouldn’t be able to delete them.
Are you sure? Because I had to “delete” them like a thousand times and then they were gone.
It's better to have the functionality with the notification that it might not be respected/work than not have it.
It’s weird because you presumably only use relays you trust somewhat so you should be able to delete. But on fedi DMs aren’t even encrypted so admins can see your posts and images but nobody seems to care about that.
Well the issue is anyone can submit your notes to any relays they want, so if someone was autistic enough they could just make a bot which automatically submitted your notes to a relay which didn't respect deletes. Or they could just save the notes and submit them once they are deleted.
But I still think deleting should be supported client side as most ppl aren't going to have autistic stalker bots.
How can the sober seat with the drunk?
Delete post + notes above. (When possible/implemented.*)
#[2] what about you? This sounds like a interesting feature to consider and communicate
amazed by this thread and the reactions and reponses
re: delete
Anyone can rebroadcast any note to any relay. Since a note which is valid is complete as is and there is no need of resigning or whatever to reboradcast. If you bitcoin, then think of a singed note like of a signed transaction.
This is the end #[10]
Wow! I said that? I’m so freaking smart 😅😂
Sherlock Holmes’ it it here LOL
Sherlock Holmezing it***
you’re confusing permanence with a lack of user control of their own data. nostr does not guarantee permanence nor ephemerality. you just hand your data over to nodes and they do whatever they want with it.
hopefully this will push people to realize the pointlessness of unencrypted notes and encrypted will become the default.
is a delete possible in the Nostr protocol?
Anything is possible; but relays and clients have the option to ignore anything too. So there is no reliable way to delete a note once it has been published.
From: (yakosuba) at 08/07 07:14
> is a delete possible in the Nostr protocol?
CC: #[4]
Nostrmo?