On social media and in the Nostr space in particular, there’s been a lot of debate about the idea of supporting deletion and editing of notes.
Some people think they’re vital features to have, others believe that more honest and healthy social media will come from getting rid of these features. The discussion about these features quickly turns to the feasibility of completely deleting something on a decentralized protocol. We quickly get to the “We can’t really delete anything from the internet, or a decentralized network.” argument. This crowds out how Delete and Edit can mimic elements of offline interactions, how they can be used as social signals.
When it comes to issues of deletion and editing content, what matters more is if the creator can communicate their intentions around their content. Sure, on the internet, with decentralized protocols, there’s no way to be sure something’s deleted. It’s not like taking a piece of paper and burning it. Computers make copies of things all the time, computers don’t like deleting things. In particular, distributed systems tend to use a Kafka architecture with immutable logs, it’s just easier to keep everything around, as deleting and reindexing is hard. Even if the software could be made to delete something, there’s always screenshots, or even pictures of screens. We can’t provably make something disappear.
What we need to do in our software is clearly express intention. A delete is actually a kind of retraction. “I no longer want to associate myself with this content, please stop showing it to people as part of what I’ve published, stop highlighting it, stop sharing it.” Even if a relay or other server keeps a copy, and keeps sharing it, being able to clearly state “hello world, this thing I said, was a mistake, please get rid of it.” Just giving users the chance to say “I deleted this” is a way of showing intention. It’s also a way of signaling that feedback has been heard. Perhaps the post was factually incorrect or perhaps it was mean and the person wants to remove what they said. In an IRL conversation, for either of these scenarios there is some dialogue where the creator of the content is learning something and taking action based on what they’ve learned.
Without delete or edit, there is no option to signal to the rest of the community that you have learned something because of how the content is structured today. On most platforms a reply or response stating one’s learning will be lost often in a deluge of replies on the original post and subsequent posts are often not seen especially when the original goes viral. By providing tools like delete and edit we give people a chance to signal that they have heard the feedback and taken action.
The Nostr Protocol supports delete and expiring notes. It was one of the reasons we switched from secure scuttlebutt to build on Nostr. Our nos.social app offers delete and while we know that not all relays will honor this, we believe it’s important to provide social signaling tools as a means of making the internet more humane.
We believe that the power to learn from each other is more important than the need to police through moral outrage which is how the current platforms and even some Nostr clients work today.
It’s important that we don’t say Nostr doesn’t support delete. Not all apps need to support requesting a delete, some might want to call it a retraction. It is important that users know there is no way to enforce a delete and not all relays may honor their request.
Edit is similar, although not as widely supported as delete. It’s a creator making a clear statement that they’ve created a new version of their content. Maybe it’s a spelling error, or a new version of the content, or maybe they’re changing it altogether. Freedom online means freedom to retract a statement, freedom to update a statement, freedom to edit your own content. By building on these freedoms, we’ll make Nostr a space where people feel empowered and in control of their own media.
Such a great topic! Curious to see how it plays out over time. 🕰️ 🔌
Well said. I'm not at all a fan of the idea of not being able to delete or edit a comment. The argument of a "more honest internet" is a cope. Yes, both features can be misused but privacy is a human right. While it's true that you can't truly, fully delete things online (and, of course, the technical challenges of throwing a decentralized platform into the mix), that doesn't mean users shouldn't have full control over their online presence as far as the technology permits.
I mean, every one of us has said things online that we would like to forget, and definitely wouldn't want associated with our modern persona. It's not like we're all born with the knowledge of privacy and the permanence of the internet, especially those of us who grew up with the internet. How is it fair that we would all have to potentially pay the price of our past internet idiocy just so we can have a "more honest internet"? It's just a stupid concept. It's like saying, "privacy is dead so let's just give every bit of info to everyone who wants it". That whole argument is a total joke and it doesn't hold up to logic.
See, this is exactly what bugs me about the maxi mentality against privacy coins like Monero. Yes, I love Bitcoin but that doesn't mean I don't take issue with some of its concepts. The immutable, public ledger is a privacy issue; just because it's pseudonymous, that doesn't mean I'm okay with people knowing every transaction I make if they are able to attach a real-world identity to my wallet address(es).
At the end of the day, you cannot have self-sovereignty without privacy.
You are absolutely correct here. Its weird that there are fans of Nostr that don't support maximum privacy and anonymity. In a world where freedom of speech is no longer easy, safe or legal moving to Nostr without privacy safe guards becomes much less worthwhile for many.
I've been playing around with Nostr for a couple of months trying to figure out how to use the different apps on different platforms. It's now time to dig into the protocol and understand how it actually works. I hope to find more quality content like yours on Nostr itself. Thanks for your contribution.
These are all FANTASTIC points! I definitely agree that clients should offer the option to edit or request deletion, which is one reason I love #Amethyst so much. I still think we should make it clear what the limitations are when folks are asking about it, though.
How do we get delete to work on njump.me? its still caching deleted items from other relays
### Summary
The debate around deletion and editing features in decentralized networks like Nostr revolves around balancing technical feasibility with social intentions, focusing on empowering users to retract or revise content rather than ensuring complete removal.
### Facts
- 📝 Some believe deletion and editing are essential for more honest social media, while others argue against it.
- 🌐 Decentralized protocols like Nostr cannot guarantee permanent deletion due to technical limitations.
- 🖥️ Computers often keep copies, making it hard to completely delete content.
- 💬 Deletion and editing mimic real-life social interactions and signal learning or regret.
- 🛠️ These tools help users express intent, signaling mistakes or feedback, despite technical restrictions.
- 🔄 Nostr supports delete and expiring notes, although not all relays honor deletions.
- ✏️ Edit allows creators to update content or correct errors, enhancing freedom in content control.
- 💡 Deletion and editing empower users to manage their online media, fostering a more humane internet experience.
Summarized by https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/cbgecfllfhmmnknmamkejadjmnmpfjmp
Oddbean new post about login | logout 