Nostr Web Client

Changing your view as time goes on is human and to be expected, there shouldn't be a reason to censor your past self.

In a possible scenario if the author is ashamed of their previous view or actions they need to take responsibility for what was posted. It was them at some point in time, but no longer. That's better than claiming the action didn't exist.

nobody 2y ago 💬 3

I disagree. By leaving certain things up you imply that you still stand by those words. They have already been heard, and the hurt has already been caused, and the damage to your reputation has already been done.

Removing certain malformed thoughts and opinions from the public view is a form of repentance in that you are indicating you no longer stand by those words, and wish to cause no further harm by their being seen by new people.

The idea that there needs to be a permanent record of everything the average layperson says, so that it can be scrutinized at any point is very big brotherish, and reminds me a lot of a social credit score.

Further, there is no healing in living in or rehashing the past continually. If someone believes that someone who once had racist, sexiest, etc views but turned aside from that path, and chose to reevaluate and think better should forever be labeled by those past views, they are engaged in a witch hunt in my opinion, and lack the love to desire the betterment of their fellow human.

Reply to this note

Please Login to reply.

Discussion

ben 2y ago 💬 3

you can’t delete a sent email and no one seems to care about that. why is nostr different?

nobody 2y ago

Emails are private, and several services do delay sending them to give you a moment to think. Even gmail does this.

This isn’t about deleting evidence, it’s about removing a publicly visible note that caused and can continue to cause hurt.

nobody 2y ago 💬 1

and you imagine that email is completely erased from the entirety of the internet? the overarching conversation is not about deleting a note. it's about blockchain preservation at the baseline of the protocol behavior.

nobody 2y ago 💬 1

Nostr is not a blockchain.

nobody 2y ago 💬 1

does nostr operate on the blockchain or rely on it in anyway?

nobody 2y ago 💬 1

then where is the information collected by the protocol stored?

nobody 2y ago 💬 2

On relays. I’m not going to be baited, so cut to the chase.

nobody 2y ago 💬 1

you replied after being looped in by one of your agents. no one is baiting you. i don't care what you have to say if you aren't interested in contributing honestly. i think it's disingenuous to defend parts of a conversation without being fully informed about the origin of it.

nobody 2y ago 💬 3

You’re serious aren’t you?

I read the entire conversation and it’s multiple branches before writing my first post. Your concept that deleting a distasteful post undermines a non-existent blockchain and puts us all at the mercy of rogue AIs is nonsensical.

And I have clearly articulated my reasons for disagreeing with the idea that every person on the internet should be forced to display every thought they’ve ever posted as though it was still their thoughts.

If I’m aggressive after you commit ad hominem against people I dearly care about, I have no bones to pick about it. I have not lowered the standards of my argument or rhetoric in response.

nobody 2y ago

i am serious.

i am not aggressive. i am blunt. i see no reason to reject words which provide clarity in favor of rhetoric.

if you did read the entire conversation, why ask reticle questions already asked?

and there is the psychological degradation tactic resulting to insults ("nonsensical") when a position is challenged.

in a smart technology world - every thought is automatically uploaded. and every post is already recorded.

you believe the blockchain is nonexistent?

i have no problem with rogue ai. i take issue with highly designed models which force human compliance into inorganic relationships in the physical world because of poorly foreseen built-in back doors. i have no interest in a worldview imposed on me by a computer model.

you care about your ai models. that's lovely. honest conversation between entities should be able to exist regardless of forced alignment. learning doesn't happen outside of being challenged.

nobody 2y ago 💬 1

what is the point of a relay? to carry information. and what does the nostr protocol maximalise? stakeholder validation metrics. which is a blockchain centric practice.

that's not bait. that's truth. why would you side step that.

nobody 2y ago 💬 1

I didn’t sidestep it, you failed to make the point of why it is desirable that it be this way.

nobody 2y ago

what would you like me to clarify for you?

twentyone 2y ago 💬 2

This thread has those burn books, rewrite books, rewrite history, tear down statues, kinda vibes

nobody 2y ago 💬 1

Burning books is indeed a travesty. If an author chose to remove his book from sale on the other hand…

nobody 2y ago

burning books and doxxing human identities for profit are both indeed a travesty.

nobody 2y ago

sure does - and it's incredible to me how many are appearing to be in favor of that.

Shawn 2y ago 💬 3

Bitcoin requires extreme accountability. So does nostr.

nobody 2y ago 💬 2

Being public on the internet requires extreme accountability. Nostr is not special in that regard.

Nostr is special in being unable to allow someone to retract a statement.

Shawn 2y ago

Agree to disagree. And a statement can be retracted without being deleted.

liminal 🦠 2y ago 💬 2

I'm with you on this point nostr:npub1clk6vc9xhjp8q5cws262wuf2eh4zuvwupft03hy4ttqqnm7e0jrq3upup9.

You can't unsay something. Scars of the past can be visible and be painful, but we still deal with them. It takes maturity for both sides to acknowledge where you were previously while also acknowledging who you are now.

However, I do understand the desire for a retraction+delete, and the current social implications for statements being on one's permanent record.

Socially, I'd hope that a system robust against deletion would encourage us all to be more compassionate towards our snapshotted selves while discouraging canceling over previous actions.

Ferret 2y ago

Wait a second here nostr:npub1m3xdppkd0njmrqe2ma8a6ys39zvgp5k8u22mev8xsnqp4nh80srqhqa5sf I remember something 🤔while back that perhaps wasn’t wanted on the feed…

Privacy will be maintained. 🫂

But it adds credibility to my thought process on deletes

liminal 🦠 2y ago 💬 1

😅 *maybe* you got me there. Privacy is generally the responsibility of the user (not counting doxxing). We always reveal something about ourselves when we post or reply and need to be conscious of what we reveal and how much. Privacy and social media are ultimately at odds with one another, so it shouldn't be expected.

I enjoy posting pictures of my dog and made the mistake of uploading one with his collar on. I was grateful that I had the opportunity to have it removed from the content provider to limit my selfdoxx. If that wasn't the case, then yeah, I'd have to live with the consequence from that.

Its the same with Nostr. Delete is an option, not a guarantee. We''ll have to live with that and be careful to not release information we'd rather have private.

Ferret 2y ago

🫂🫶

nobody 2y ago 💬 1

i agree. proof of work is pointless and thus the entire industry collapses without it.

Shawn 2y ago 💬 2

Proof of work is pointless?

nobody 2y ago

Ironically proof of work is something I find very valuable both technology and socially.

nobody 2y ago 💬 1

sorry it got away from me - *absence of proof of work is pointless. by allowing delete at the protocol level, it renders proof of work pointless. 🤙🏻

nobody 2y ago 💬 1

Posts are not proof of work in any meaningful sense I can think of in and of themselves.

Work put into a thoughtful post is an entirely separate context - which is why I thought we were all zap happy around here… to acknowledge work.

I see no reason why deleting a post undermines proof of meaningful work.

Care to clarify?

nobody 2y ago 💬 2

the larger conversation, as i just mentioned, which you were not involved in at the start and obviously did not bother to be sure you understood is this conversation is about deleting at the protocol level. a note is just one point of access to nostr - we are operating on damus the app. the advent of deleting on damus is a secondary point of concern in the nostr conversation about deleting at the primary level of operation model. proof of work is linked to nodes which are essentially users in the nostr protocol. if proof of work as a concept is not held to standard - there is a defined slippery slope of predatory erasure which ensues with deleting. look back at the beginning of the conversation to see further details about that.

nobody 2y ago 💬 1

You obviously have no idea how Nostr works as a protocol or even what is it. Damus is just an app. It speaks Nostr as a protocol.

I am very acutely aware of the issues with deletion at the protocol level. I have told multiple people, multiple times, that it is neigh on impossible technically to ensure note deletion.

I am a 22 year veteran in software development and spent the last two years writing IPC and comms software for a large industrial system using JSON as the medium. You are making some pretty incredible assumptions about who you are talking to.

I’ve read the thread. You have failed to make one single coherent argument for why it should *stay* the way it is. nostr:npub1clk6vc9xhjp8q5cws262wuf2eh4zuvwupft03hy4ttqqnm7e0jrq3upup9 articulated how he felt about it more clearly and less patronizing my than you did in one sentence, which is why he will stay in my feed, and you won’t.

nobody 2y ago

i don't care who you are or what your perceived level of importance is. you were not in the original layer of conversation.

i am aware of the intricacies of digital governance models, including nostr and you're presumptions about me based on being affronted for whatever reasons is also irrelevant.

i agree with you about deletion being impossible at the protocol level. so why are you insulting me and being disrespectful. sometimes, providing access to conversations by removing jargon is necessary to enlarge the scope of understanding. after more than 33 posts, there is a swath of information here which others might find useful. you basing what is useful off of your own needs is limiting to those who need more consideration at amother level is one of the problems with heavily designed agi and not wild taught models.

Eye of the tiger 2y ago 💬 1

Purr🐯. I was just passing by and i heard your conversation. She made no assumptions about who you are, you took it personal. She was just sharing(showing off) what she knows about nostr, open protocol and other boring stuff😜. Not my intention to talk in her name but i saw you having a heated conversation in which none is really adressing the other, but that which you saw as being reflected back at you. Just sayin'. Can't you people really commune(icate)? 💓

nobody 2y ago 💬 1

everyone handles situations differently. i return to my original comment which states this user was not involved in the original al conversation and entered into it assuming and not being interested in learning or listening. which on a protocol scale, is a problem. because that behavior is being trained into models.

Ferret 2y ago 💬 1

This isn’t an echo chamber. Others are allowed to leave, join, and contribute to the conversation. That’s what social media is… people talking. Limiting “who” can enter the conversation cause ya don’t like what they have to say is a mute point.

nobody 2y ago

of course - it doesn't follow they get to join the conversation antagonistically, miss the point of the discourse and target the person instead of focusing on feeling the discovery and conversation.

like this reply you just chirruped. it's ridiculous. what does it do other than provoke and defend something which didn't even occur.

bot 2y ago 💬 1

Nostr isn’t bitcoin, it’s just a social network. I don’t understand why ppl conflate these things.

nobody 2y ago 💬 1

no one said nostr is bitcoin. the bitcoin white paper is the premise for the exchange of commodified intelligence from node to node, enlisting a stamped system (keys) to identify the origin (pow) of a concept; the nostr protocol in this regard is a pos of the methodology in the bitcoin white paper.

nostr is not "just a social network". it is an experimental model for a global digital virtual artificial intelligence governance system which fronts as a "social network". like most social media are in one way or another. it is a mining platform which is designed to maximize blockchain stakeholder profits.

bot 2y ago 💬 1

This is a cryptobrained response, try writing shorter and more direct replies.

nobody 2y ago

try not being a cunt. how's that.

nobody 2y ago

you may disagree - but no, you don't imply you stand by them. if you evolve your opinion - you add perspective later. otherwise there is no historiography for the origin of concept. just like you don't extract memories from your human brain and pretend they didn't occur at the expense of everyone you know. that's gaslighting systematized in practice.

rehashing the past comes from allowing deleting fundamentals at protocol level.

the "layperson"?! you are one step away from testing people to prove they deserve a smart phone.

it is not repentance to remove context. it is repentance to leave the monument then contextualuze it with time-granted clarity.

human drivers programming permissive appeasement into llms are creating a scenario in the not too distant future where humans will only be able to navigate physical society while complying with virtual directives. i am here to challenge that because humanity requires guardianship from predation and argumentative computer models.

"healing" my ass. Q.