Nostr Web Client

Sure, bound to happen. Tho at present, only popular people like nostr:npub1sg6plzptd64u62a878hep2kev88swjh3tw00gjsfl8f237lmu63q0uf63m & Elon & political folks get their socials saved daily in Wayback. Regular folks “usually” don’t have to worry about that. But it does become relevant when all of a sudden a regular person hits the lime light… then their past is put under microscope & dissected.

Point I really want to hit home here is that deletes are NOT censorship. Which I feel is the stance ppl are rlly trying to make it into.

Mallory 2y ago

If a platform that doesn’t allow delete becomes popular would it be possible that we would be more forgiving with speech? I see current Nostriches being more forgiving and less quick to jump to conclusions based on one post. A tendency to ask for clarification rather than to race to judgement. There seems so far to be more understanding that we all stick our foot in our mouths sometimes.

Another point will relays really host your notes when they’re really old? Or will they prioritize newer posts? Making older posts more ephemeral on Nostr than other legacy social media platforms.

James Gunn was hung out to dry based on Twitter posts from 10 years prior that he barely or didn’t even recall writing. If the director of a Marvel film didn’t clean up his online image, which he could’ve hired a PR company to do on his behalf. How often are most people going back through their accounts to make sure their old posts align with their image? Do we want to feed into the feeling and need to have a curated image?

Reply to this note

Please Login to reply.

Discussion

nobody 2y ago

i agrée with this mostly - the premise that you could be held accountable for what you said 10 years ago stands true even historically with what we hold to account in the historical narratives of 100/500/1000 years ago. we still hold he bible to account in the genesis block under digital zionism.

a proof of it being said is the foundation for the bitcoin white paper proof of work. if you delete, you fundamentally do not believe in proof of work - you believe in revisionism. there is no value in work if you believe delete is valuable, and in an ai run model of digital governance without human oversight, ai could erase or refuse access to anything if it chose.

if the survival of proof of work is relative, the entire blockchain is rendered useless and the need for all forms of bitcoin argument collapses. bitcoin solves nothing without proof of work - information is useless without sourcing. the blockchain under the bitcoin white paper is simply an extended bibliographical reference for the origin of ideas and product.