Straw man argument, and also legally false. A deletion request can’t necessarily force someone to delete the post, but it should still be possible to request.
Discussion
Legally false? ok mr. bot esquire.
I’m sure the state wants the documents posted on wikileaks deleted.
If you want someone else to do something for you, it’s better to ask nicely, or pay them. But you have to be willing to live with the fact that sometimes the answer will be no.
So then you agree that deletes should be a feature.
Btw relay jannies have zero legal standing as to the copyright of the things you publish. Imagine if an authority could just take your work and do with it what they please.
Literally what wikileaks does
They typically publish government works, which are not protected by copyright. But yeah, look where that guy is, that’s how the real world works, you’re just in denial.
“look where that guy is”
Very telling reply from #[3]
Recorded this from my phone through Nostrgram, if I do this again it will be done through my desktop.
I technically disagree with the premise. Relay operators *are* hosting the notes, but they're hosts in the same way that twitter is a host, not responsible for what end users actually post. The idea (as I saw it) was that relay operators in different jurisdictions would be subject to different laws. So lets say hypothetically that Germany wanted to take one of bot's notes down they could force German relay operators to remove the notes, but not say a relay in the Canary Islands so that would provide some resiliency for the end user in the case of censorship.
However for an end user, if bot is hypothetically in the US and a US court directs them to remove a post they would generally expect to have that functionality. It's understood that this may not scrub the post from existence due to on or offline archiving of said post, but it would at least be removed from the primary source where possible.
Now if we look at deletes on nostr. I tested from other apps today creating a note on iris.to and then deleting it on snort.social. All of the relays listed on NADAR accepted that delete including damus.io. Unless damus is specifically flagging notes sent from the app differently it should be possible to delete those notes from other apps. As such you aren't making nostr delete proof, you're merely inconveniencing your users, forcing them to either migrate to another option or switch between damus and another tool if they wish to or are compelled to delete note(s).
Yes, and that censorship protection already exists since relays can be in different jurisdictions. The issue of allowing ppl to delete their own posts is a completely separate topic. Btw section 230 doesn’t give relay jannies blanket immunity.
I think a good middle ground would be having relays that explicitly refuse to delete posts that ppl can voluntarily use.
But if government agents are coming to your house to make you delete social media posts, the problem isn’t just going to go away because you “can’t” on Damus.
Would be nice but unfortunately:
note1vlqpuyp8drja3wxr887smkdj7uurs6tl7gheanmpfsvr80c99z3q40qdxz
no