Replies (53)
I like delete.
I've come around to this position. For a long time I was a delete purist, but I agree it's important to be able to delete. A term like "tombstone" captures the intention better I think, since it's possible to prove a person said something and also that they retracted it. Relays and clients should respect delete, but also communicate to users what the limits actually are.
ok then here is an idea maybe not deleted but hide allows someone on nostr to hide the message so no one on nostr can see it
😂 tombstone? And you thought my names were bad lol
Rabbleが「みんなNostrは削除できないから使わないって言ってる！NostrのNIPには削除がちゃんとあるし、削除はできるんのに！でもいくつかのアプリは削除のアイディアを好まない、あるいはどこまで削除できているかわからないという理由から削除機能自体をオミットしている！しかし削除はコンテンツの除去くらい重要な社会的シグナルだ(あとは長文を読んでね！)」的な投稿をしている。後で長文読むか。
View quoted note →So there’s a large group of people waiting to join #nostr so they can delete notes?
I didn't invent the name, it's been suggested before
I’m with you on this. I deleted over 10k of my notes just to demonstrate that delete works pretty well here.
There is ALWAYS FREEDOM to change REVISE a VIEWPONT of published in subsequent note - (leaving aside typo errors) but just like "word spoken out of mouth cannot retracted back" short works the same way. no one can guarantee that someone didnot grab screenshot what u said/posted before in decentralized mesh. just somewhat wayback web machine archive old webpage.
me too
There is no such thing as “delete purism” unless the data only existed on your local drive. And even then 🤔…
View quoted note →not a guaranteed service even if NIP is proposed n passed - nos.social will make it easier to attempt it.
There is the whole nostr delete service which anyone can use to request their own content be deleted:
Publish Nostr Event Deletions!
Publish Nostr Event Deletions.
have used it - it works fine if note is FRESH not propagated far away relays
If y’all support delete you aren’t allowed to call it the time chain.
yeah that makes sense push faster
I’m a pretty strong believer in the right to be forgotten online from a privacy and safety pov.
The only argument I’ve heard to counter is that a delete function could put someone’s freedom of speech at risk, negating the point of nostr. I don’t really see how that’s possible though because the danger would mostly (in this case) come from relays censoring, not the individual, which is possible in the current state of things (I think).
If relays stop hosting your content to save money in the long term, won’t you be deleted eventually, as well?
Having a “request to delete” button is fine in most cases, even if people understand some relays may not comply. You are still lowering your digital footprint if a stalker gets out of control etc.
Implement the delete function. Not having it takes away, i would argue, an aspect of soverignty. Isn't this the crux of the matter? Shouldn't all clients have the function enabled?
Last year i made a quip on nostr that was in poor taste, I thought it was funny but it offended some people who I respect. So I apologized and deleted it, but I had to use blastr to get the delete event out there because my original note had been blasted out by other people. If I hadn’t been able to delete the original note then people would find it long after and they probably wouldn’t see the retraction or apology.
rem that note lastyr - it can happen any human - think hypothetical example Trump tweeting at midnight his fat finger slips LoL
Exactly
funny that you think you know about distributed systems and you never heard of tombstones
Yep! Glad nos has delete. Have used it at least 3 times
it's been around for a long time, apache cassandra is the first mention in this wikipedia article, circa 2011
Tombstone (data store) - Wikipedia
Rabble and co are doing a job in convincing me as well. I like the term retract.
Allow me to challenge.
A unique characteristic about nostr relative to twitter is that the note lives on in one or more relays, and local client databases.
So if a note has been published across various machines, and we are optimizing for user choice, should the nostr user on the receiving end of the note have the option of honoring (or not) deletion requests?
I use delete on Amethyst and Snort from time to time if I make a typo and it's only been a few seconds. I quickly delete and hope no one interacts with it before relays get the delete request. If not all clients and relays support delete then it's really hard to delete things.
This post convinced me. Even if the post doesnt really get deleted. I broadcasted my intention of doing so.
This makes sense.
it is a core principle of signals intelligence that once the message goes over an untrusted channel it is likely captured
but that still doesn't stop people from respecting this anyhow
it's one of the benefits of a network protocol like LN, it isn't broadcast so the chances of a delete request being respected are higher at being successful on such a channel, the majority of channel rebalances are discarded after they are no longer able to be applied
It's not that we don't support delete, its that we support accountability.
i liked it when you CANT delete/edit notes it makes #nostr different than other social media
Silicon Valley Millennial flexible morality is strong with this one.
Nostr has always supported delete. The clients you used just didn’t support it. You don’t have to delete anything if you dont want to.
ah ok we're the same as fedi
Maybe there should be a „regret“ button instead 😝
It‘s rather an update of the content, right? Replaceable with an excuse.
See my analogy to being "live on TV". Nostr is a decentralized broadcast network, you can't reliably delete things, no barrage of NIPs will change this.
View quoted note →Your ambitions to be a North Korean dictator are kind of cute but in the real world the user decides what choices they have.
I kinda like the idea of deleting tbh.
But the other side of the argument is: in your case there is the argument that you could have just replied to your own post with the apology, making it a thread. People would be able to see the "offense" as well as the apology and judge for themselves if it is warranted or not.
Where if you had deleted it, people who didn't see the original would only see your apology and have to take your word instead of judging for themselves.
But again, I see how prospect users can be turned off by it.
I am sympathetic to deleting notes, but personally I'd much prefer a way to Edit them. That is only available for the first 15 min or so, and where edits are public.
90% of the notes that I wanted to delete were bc of typos or bc I forgot to say something. Somehow my IQ increases right after I press the post button and I spot a bunch of errors that I didn't when proof reading the post...
I think that’s what occurs,
@rabble correct me if I’m wrong.
@elsat I’ve used the delete feature on
@nos and it’s worded in such a way that the relay owners are being asked to delete the note. Based on the current wording, it doesn’t sound like nos is promising (nor would
It make sense that they could promise) the relays will actually delete it.
To that end though, I think it’d be cool if there were a way to let the requestor know which relays didn’t choose to delete as requested. It would help the requestor determine if they want to continue to use that relay or not; keenly if it’s one they pay into.
Yes, if you assume clients don’t store notes long term, then it comes down to relay choice.
This resonates
I added a comment
while I think deleting should be possible on any client, I don't think those people would use Nostr if it were so. They'll find something else
This should be done by issuing a new note which says it is a new revision of the previous one. Clients can then make the link and show the most recent version (as well as potentially the old one or what changed).
Yes, that does seem like the way to go. But on the user's side, the workflow should be intuitive and quick
Delete works fine. If a relay doesn't respect it, eventually it would become an unpopular relay. If people think/thought there weren't copies of their deleted tweets somewhere, they were kidding themselves
