Oddbean new post about login | logout On Facebook, I see edit scams all the time. Someone makes a post about a missing dog or something, tons of people share it around, and later it gets edited to something trying to sell $10 sunglasses. As ridiculous a technique it may be, it hinges on people's emotions to work. Whether they sell any sunglasses or not is beside the point. Over time, the people sharing those posts become reluctant of what may be legitimate information & the actual missing dog gets no coverage. Aside from complexity & centralization risk, there's a lot of moral reasons to avoid it, especially when delete is getting adopted. From a user standpoint, if missing context or a typo is that big of a deal: delete it, repeat it. It's not hard. #forevertypo
Is it really so bad? I was speculating here https://stacker.news/items/756409/r/dtonon?commentId=757681 that they have some AI to check potential abusive edits when the context requires it (great exposure and many responses/reactions already recorded). Maybe I overestimated these big tech circuses. Btw, I agree, delete and delayed sending is everything we need.
imo, it would be simple enough for clients to do automatic typo corrections, conservatively, anyway but i hadn't heard of this kind of scam before, and it definitely is an issue, so i'm leaning towards the option of "show newer versions" and always show the original first to users, if you are going to support it at all fundamentally i don't see why not but the scam potential definitely makes the original more important and less vulnerable to manipulation
i mean default to "show original" fiatjaf is right that it increases the complexity of the protocol, but fundamentally if every edit post or diff update refers to the OP of the thread, a filter that just searches for the op itself and all events that put an "e" tag to that event will find the whole thread in one simple two part filter
Showing the original first probably wouldn't go over very well with people legitimately editing typos (or adding missing words 😂) why would anyone click through edits when the original is hilarious or clear enough to extrapolate the intended meaning?
I reread that twice to make sure I had all the words in there 😅
haha... nah, i have an idea though... the edits should appear as a series of sliders, so it shows the original first, and when you slide it, it shows what branches off from it... this way everything stays in context and the "no edits" and the anti-change-after-lots-of-share scam effect is weakened if people edit, then you just click/swipe left to see the newer versions and it updates the children of that post also consider the problem that happens when someone mentions a post, and then it gets materially changed like what you talked about... the interface should show the one that is linked, and this could be an after-original update, so if i boost your second version, in my boost post it shows the second version, but if i were to boost the original, it shows the original retaining the context is really important i think... and allowing viewers to see the old versions is also a good thing, keeps people honest
I would use that to tell stories... Once upon a time (swipe) there was a girl as tiny as a thimble(swipe) 😅
i like that a lot... let's get hzrd149 to implement it on nostrudel
as in, show whichever version is referred to in a boost/embed/quote, but show the slider arrows and make it a "slider" so on touch interfaces it can be swiped left and right, like one of those stupid time scroller things that are popular for landing pages, and make one setting "show original or show newest" in the settings and respect that in the display when the original is referred to... so if someone wants to see the newest, it shows the newest, but when you swipe, it changes the tree underneath it as well
lol it would be neat, but it really sounds like a different feature than an edit at that point, for me
it can do both!