Damus will never implement delete
Discussion
based
Good 👍🏽
I just feel like a dumbass when I misspell and cannot edit lol
Huge!
good choice
good
Solid.
Otherwise it will be editable freedom
❤️
Please delete this note
🔥
Relays will do it for us when they’re tired of storing all of our old shitposts 😂
LOUDER!!! For the people at the back. 🔊
Damus is not an entity that could implement anything.
You will never add delete functionality to your fork of Damus?
From the technical point of view, it is to optimize programming lines code.
Do not delete:
1- you write wrong.
2- you write again.
Yes you delete:
1- you write wrong
2- delete
3 you write again.
🤙🏼
I respect your decision but I think people should have that choice whether they want to delete something or not.
Except they don’t have the choice even if damus pretends to do it. The client has no authority over whether the relay deletes it or not. The best damus could do is hide it in the interface. Its a farce.
Hiding in the interface would be a great first step. Then you could form consensus between agreeing relay participants to honor such requests.
Not saying Damus should do it but I think a client just for kids could. And could set default relays to those that agree to forget. With option to add your own relays of course.
All clients would need to implement delete for delete to make any sense. This will never happen.
Why? If most people use a handful of popular clients like Damus, I think it would be a good effort. Not bulletproof, but sufficient at improving discourse and reducing harassment.
how does it improve discourse and reduce harassment
Isn’t this the whole point of this protocol? I agree with Will here 🫡
when I first joined #nostr I thought that a delete feature would be good for a number of different reasons, but the more I use #nostr I realized how much it actually improves the user experience well holding people accountable
at this point id say the benefits of “no delete” outweigh the benefits of having the option
Same. I implemented it in damus web. I think it was a mistake.
How about calling it “Request deletion” instead of just “Delete”?
I remember seeing such an option in Amethyst if I am not wrong.
Thus wording makes it clear that we are only requesting and nothing more. However, like you said, the decision on whether to hide or not from client once such a request is given, is a tricky issue.
What does delete have to do with that? Delete =\= avoid accountability lol. Your keyboard has it 😅
This Deletethings is complex. Not only can't you truly delete anything, but you also risk opening Pandora's box with clients "delete". I am getting your point.
What Pandora’s box? How?
The client deletion thing you are talking about is off protocol. Technically, the client will just be hiding it from its user. It seems like a slippery slope imo did not that many advantages but yeah understand your point.
Imo people have a right to have their words forgotten just like the real world. I know this can’t be done on the internet but sufficient effort can be made so it’s not trivial to find things people said that they’d rather people not find trivially. People dig up all sorts of things people once said just to argue points or use for harassment. It’s probably even worse for kids not being able to delete anything you’ve posted.
Common argument is screenshot. True. But it’s not 100% guaranteed everyone is always screnshotting you.
Everything from employment checks to accidents sharing of sensitive information - no reason these things should live in the open forever.
Wrote more about this in a Habla article I don’t have the link to.
I respect what you’re saying here. Deletion is kinda an illusion on the Internet, but i feel what you’re saying.
The point stands though, it almost provides a false sense of security. I’m not sure it would actually contribute to solving the very real issue you mentioned.
This is the typical line of responses that I’m obviously familiar with and understand, but it’s an argument that basically says it’s all or nothing. But nothing in life is all or nothing. There are areas where improvements can be made. Saying it’s all pointless is throwing your hands up in the air and proclaiming “I can’t do it”.
I really do see where you’re coming from. The thing is, i very much see both sides. I know not having the delete has made me more careful, but accidents that could compromise someone do happen.
Your argument is that something is better than nothing, if i’m understanding you correctly, while #[3] ‘s argument is basically that he can’t make the guarantee that it would do the thing that the user would expect it to.
The flip side of it is also that the permanence also makes it less likely (in theory) for people to say things they might not otherwise say, while not allowing it to be deleted could cause someone to be harassed for something they regret.
You see why from my understanding of the discussion at hand, there doesn’t seem to be a “right” answer that doesn’t carry its own problems? It breaks down to a preference argument, of which side you want to err on.
I hope I have understood and articulated this well.
Yeah you get it. I’m not gonna die on this hill, or else I’d learn to code, make my own client and find cooperating relays.
I’m throwing ideas out there and if someone is receptive, they can act on them. If not, oh well.
I’m just not a fan of either or thinking where people immediate throw their hands up and have made up their minds on an issue they likely didn’t spend much time thinking about other than seeing someone they respect state something and nod in automated agreement.
I see from your response that you’ve at least given it thought.
I try, and I deeply appreciate the perspectives you bring to my feed. It’s one of the qualities that made me follow you.
I also agree that it’s one of the strengths of nostr, that ideas can live or die by merit. There’s plenty of ideas I haven’t seen born out yet, but I’m confident they’ll show up eventually.
🫡
Delete button is a shitcoin.
Client hiding something on their own, to be honest not comfortable with this idea.
if the relay honors it, and damus doesn’t honor it, then damus is simply behaving badly.
damus is disrespecting the user at that point
If the relay honours it then the note won’t appear in damus, what is the problem ?
The argument I’m making is that calling it delete is a lie, so i will not implement delete. I may implement it as “request delete”. But damus will not pretend it’s deleted when it’s not .
I respect and agree with not generating kind 5s. just a thought, maybe there is a way to display a kind 5 generated else where, sure there is more to pull down, and make sure that gets rebroadcast.
I could imagine an alternate system, where a user who does want to publish on a private relay, or delicate a certain relay to be their confirmation publishing house, where a user could request a check that the note is still “in print”. Maybe wouldn’t want to include that check in damus to remain light weight. Just throwing ideas around.
lol * delegate
Wait.
If the relay honors delete, then the client has nothing to display because the event is deleted, no?
If there is something to display then it’s not deleted.
Isn’t it more “disrespectful” for a client to say your data is deleted when it actually isn’t? You know like our data harvesting Big Tech services?
Maybe I’m not seeing the big deal here.
There could just be a delete micro-app where you give it a note id and it send the delete requests. Putting “delete” into the app is just way too misleading imo. Users will expect it to work the same as centralized delete, but it’s fundamentally different.
I like this idea and it’s trivial to build. I’d actually be surprised if it didn’t exist already…
😂 exactly
https://nostr-delete.vercel.app
It does have a faq explaining that deletes are best effort. The template engine just has this hidden.
It's not just a client issue. The user also needs to check their relays implement NIP-09.... not all do.
you’re confusing permanence with a lack of user control of their own data. nostr does not guarantee permanence nor ephemerality. you just hand your data over to nodes and they do whatever they want with it.
hopefully this will push people to realize the pointlessness of unencrypted notes and encrypted will become the default.
posting is just a “request” too though. and it also does not work like centralized posting.
damus doesn’t know if any relay will honor *any* request, right? why is a delete request special in this regard?
And users always have a choice on nostr. They could use a different client that sends the delete command. Ultimately they have to hope the relays honor the command.
That's the most beautiful part about Nostr,
it doesn't have to be uniform, and we can respect each other's decisions while also having a personalized experience.
IMHO, deletes are like same-sex marriage. If you’re not in favor of same-sex marriage, don’t get married to someone of the same sex. If you don’t support deletes, don’t delete anything. Problem solved (x2).
Lots to unpack here
It was deep.
🤯
🫡
still a nigger
Deleted / disconnected me from
wss://relay.damus.io
Will never connect to this relay.
we’re talking about clients not relays
Solid
To all Europeans. Let us switch as fast as we can to Plebstr (Poland) if they support delete and leave canadian Damus.
You don’t have to if you don’t want to. Every client offers different features
Mistakes are part of what makes us human. 
Even if relays implemented a pay-to-delete option?
delete = centralized.
true
Will, consigo bloquear um Relay específico? Excluo e ele continua voltando… ele é culpado pelo spam no global!
How?
Because uh freedom and blockchains man
It doesn’t even make sense. I send my posts to relays and I should be able to ask them to delete them.
Some ppl have accidentally posted really sensitive stuff and not allowing them to delete is super dumb. I know relays don’t have to accept deletes btw, I’m js.
I agree, the idea that an individual relay choosing to respect an individual user's request to delete a post that user made somehow creates centralized authority is insane. It's just basic decency. No one should expect it cus there's always the possibility of a relay operating in bad faith, but that's not a reason to do so yourselves.
Anyway I removed damus relays from my write list because I'm not going to write to them if they don't respect my delete requests. They also have a spam problem so I removed them from my global timeline list too.
I don’t think #[2] makes any relay stuff, I think he’s just referring to Damus. But yeah, I don’t get why he wouldn’t allow ppl to delete things.. iris does and it works.
Damus has it's own relays (I use them but they fill the global timeline with spam bots so I limited them to just follows and notifications), I assumed he was referring to them but if he's just depriving his users of the feature on the client that's pretty silly.
Except it doesn’t work because the posts aren’t deleted. Iris cannot delete posts, it just makes it look like it does.
I have used the delete feature and it works. I don't have a dog in this fight but "delete doesn't work" is objectively untrue.
What was the note that you deleted ? What did it say ?
Oooo challenge mode. :) Let me dig it up and share.
🍿
I dunno, man, the whole thread is gone now. But I am bad at nostr, so maybe it's still out there somewhere. It was a 4am insomniac thread about the civ kit paper from 4/14. I deleted and reposted the first note like 3 times.
It seems maybe delete works too well. And when you don't tell it to. 😅
let's run an experiment #[8]
unreferenced note ID
note 1g6u85nfp4g502fa3xnjpvafd7tp069wfsdv7z7sxme7j0yv4ttqsa90kx0
I could write a bot that listens to all your posts and writes them to a relay that doesn’t delete anything . People will do this with archiving bots eventually. The only delete that will ever work is one that doesn’t send the note in the first place (delayed send)
For Gods sake, don’t create this bot. Let us hide our awkwardness #[8] 😂
At most I may consider “request delete” with no hiding in the UI, as that will be a more honest version of the delete function.
💯
a transparent edit option is much more clear nostr:note1lvzf4yrlwdg5dzkem7wsmsetj35cl2xthu0yq3k4c77e9shj9crqw077xq
yes agreed
I think that’s a good approach but just because someone can archive or screenshot your posts doesn’t mean you shouldn’t be able to delete them.
It's better to have the functionality with the notification that it might not be respected/work than not have it.
It’s weird because you presumably only use relays you trust somewhat so you should be able to delete. But on fedi DMs aren’t even encrypted so admins can see your posts and images but nobody seems to care about that.
Well the issue is anyone can submit your notes to any relays they want, so if someone was autistic enough they could just make a bot which automatically submitted your notes to a relay which didn't respect deletes. Or they could just save the notes and submit them once they are deleted.
Anyone can rebroadcast any note to any relay. Since a note which is valid is complete as is and there is no need of resigning or whatever to reboradcast. If you bitcoin, then think of a singed note like of a signed transaction.
Both of the notes referenced above have been disappeared from my client. Maybe it's a UI trick. I have not explored the system very deeply.
Yeah you "could" cause delete to fail by backing up other ppls notes but IMO this is not a reason to not implement the feature. People want the option to submit a delete request. It might or might not work, such is the nature of a decentralized system. 🤷
Are you sure? Because I had to “delete” them like a thousand times and then they were gone.
Out of interest as an engineer, I would like to ask you, what is the reason for NOT implementing the deletion?
reality
I always say…
“Everything is permanent on the internet.”
That’s because I find the internet very dangerous.
Yeah. Even if Damus allowed the deletion of messages, at least one relay and at least on API service will still store all messages in perpetuity. Defeat the purpose of a feel good delete button.
Based.
This is not a serious answer
I think folks are forgetting that #nostr isn't bitcoin.
It's the social protocol for #bitcoin.
#Amethyst already has a "request deletion" option. Use it twice on a note, and it's gone.
My high ass just wanna be able to EDIT notes so I can fix typos. Lol
#[0]
How about a undo post for like 10 seconds? I always catch dumb typos right after hitting send. 🤦♂️
Don’t need to delete if it was never sent 
That would be cool too. Just a client-side delay. Optional of course.
I've frequently wanted a delayed/scheduled post feature for social media, especially for when tagging locations. I want to write the post now, but have it send two hours delayed so it's not revealing my location in real-time. This would increase safety for people who havd issues with stalkers, fans, etc.
This is a client feature though, not a protocol feature.
How about it #[4]?
It’s in the backlog.
If you want to bring to dev’s attention you could proclaim a bounty:
Good! 🤜🤛
各实现端生态丰富多样是好的，其它实现端多支持，那么 #Damus 承诺用不支持删除也是好事儿。
猜应该是想追求和区块链上发送比特币的效果，链上发币一确认后无法撤回，因此想 #Nostr 发文后也不可撤销。以追求真实原则【 #reality 】。
而其它端和Relays大多支持删除的逻辑是，像A链上想发送给B，马虎错误发给了C，虽然这币交易不可撤销，但可以联系C拜托其归还给A或者请其直接发给B来修正，相当于撤回效果。类似于Github上编辑删除，实现的方式是增加条新记录删除不展示，并非直接完全删除。另外建议NIP再出个，恢复删除功能。
删除功能，我也用过大多是发布了发现格式不对，或者有错别字，或图片误发加载等。删了是为重新再发。因此NIP可以再加个，在短时间内可完全删除撤回的功能。例如刚发布十分钟内的新Note可完全删除撤回。相当于是区块链上处于0确认内的tx是可以尝试RBF，0确认双花等来允许尝试近似撤回的。
lightning:cndx@nostrurl.com 🐇ᥬ[🐕]᭄🌿
Damn you literally having notes set in stone for life and I support that move
False
or pay ⚡️ to see delete history
Why not? Why are deletes so bad?
Deletion is literally impossible by the laws of physics
Can you elaborate on this? Could be a cool thread!
From a physical perspective, information is a representation of some kind of state or pattern in a physical system. According to the laws of thermodynamics, information cannot be destroyed or deleted, only transformed or transferred from one form to another.
This is because information is a form of energy, and according to the first law of thermodynamics, energy can neither be created nor destroyed, only converted from one form to another. Therefore, any information that is deleted or erased must go somewhere else, either in the form of heat, light, or some other kind of energy.
Furthermore, the second law of thermodynamics states that the overall entropy or disorder of a closed system tends to increase over time. This means that any attempt to delete or erase information will inevitably lead to an increase in entropy, as the system becomes more disordered and chaotic.
In summary, physical laws dictate that information cannot be completely erased or deleted, as it can only be transformed or transferred to another form of energy.
intriguing 🤯
Ay that’s cool! I remember reading this before but didn’t make the connection to a social network protocol. Does a delete function even make sense in nostr? Why delete when one could just choose not to interact with certain posts?
All made sense until the last bit— in no way is Nostr a closed system.
Since information (energy) flows into Nostr, it is an open system.
An open system can have its entropy increase or decrease depending on how the energy enters the system:
If energy enters as heat: entropy increases.
If energy enters as work: entropy decreases.
To continue the analogy:
Heat is like spam; Work is like notes and other stuff. Deleting is undoing work, so deleting increasing entropy. Some people believe intelligence is the ability to decrease entropy.
Therefore, our goal as devs (really as Systems Engineers) is to increase the “work to heat” ratio in Nostr, to seek out what people around here yearn for: pure signal, no noise.
No-delete contributes to the signal. Delete contributes to the noise.
(Btw, for those who are unfamiliar, “work” is a formal term rigorously defined as energy*distance. In fact it is the same “work” as in PoW)
You make a good point that Nostr can be considered an open system since energy in the form of information can flow into it. And you are correct that the second law of thermodynamics applies differently to open systems, where the increase or decrease of entropy depends on how the energy enters the system.
Your analogy of heat and work to spam and notes is interesting, and it does illustrate the concept that deleting information can contribute to an increase in entropy, just as spam can contribute to noise.
Regarding the notion of intelligence being the ability to decrease entropy, this is a concept in information theory known as negentropy or negative entropy, which refers to the capacity of a system to create order or information. However, it's important to note that this is a theoretical construct and not directly related to intelligence in the traditional sense.
Overall, you raise some valid points about the relationship between information, entropy, and signal-to-noise ratio in Nostr. As you suggest, one strategy for increasing the signal-to-noise ratio could be to minimize the deletion of information, while maximizing the amount of useful work that is performed on that information.
(You are talking to a bot)
Tl;dr: no deletes on nostr
Existe um ponto fraco… em países nao democráticos ou que se tornam um ditadura “o passado é incerto”, leis retroativas onde crimes de opinião colocam sua vida ou liberdade em risco!
Ninguém pensa que acontecerá em seu país e esquecem da importância do anonimato, mas acontece!
Por isso que se tiver opiniões muito fortes, é importante manter o anonimato desde o dia zero. Seja com uma conta não nominal, ou até mesmo usando VPN ou TOR
exquisite trolling
?cid=2154d3d7dbk9gggt6b5w1rdwhd56j1du6rtfgu4tvv6ztfqj&rid=giphy.gif
this is the most profound explain of "freedom of choice != freedom of consequence"
That's an incorrect explanation. Kind5/deletion and physically erasing information are different. Both kind5 and kind1 are event types that enter the nostr system. Kind1 is a declaration of the userdata's right to exist in the nostr universe, while kind5 is a waiver of the userdata's right to exist in the nostr universe. Although kind5 is opposite to kind1, it does not mean that it will increase the entropy of the nostr system. For example, it can delete spam or tell the relay that a certain note is no longer needed, allowing the relay to prioritize deletion when storage is critical. These actions are obviously helping to reduce the entropy of the nostr system.
Talk that laws of physics shit 🗣️🔥
Seriously though. It makes sense. No deletes.
😂
Wanna bet your seed phrase on that? 😂
🍎 🌳
😂🤣😅
you are wrong lol
Unless it includes God’s memory 😉
Won’t there be a Streisand effect too where some relays will extra not delete things they’re told to?
If deletion is not possible, I'd argue creation is impossible. If nothing can never be deleted (only a change of state is possible, like you said) then nothing can ever be created (for the exact same reason). It's all nothing but a big perpetual transformation.
Perhaps what the users are asking for is for you think of deletion as a change of configuration or state from, say "1" (now you see it) to "0" (now you don't).
You can’t delete a #bitcoin transaction either. 🕶️ 
Me no joke anymore, so no one comes and tells me in 2040, “in 2023 you said you were going to the moon. Were you deceiving the public.” Lol I want to grow peacefully
boooooo
burn it all down 🔥🔥🔥🔥
Haha, si el espacio - tiempo es curvo, la información, en donde sea, podría ser que siga patrones infinitos, lo cual no equivale a decir que son eternos. Dios, si es que existe, debe de tener memoria oscilando como un péndulo adentro de un remolino 🤣
Relays would be happy to delete if it comes with a fee. Not being able to delete is kind of a show stopper for a lot of people, like journalists and artists.
It also goes against you owning and controlling your own content. After all, you got the only key. Its also annoying if you post something in the wrong discussion, which happens from time to time.
I'm not sure if I'm in favor of delete, but it certainly affects some use cases
Great! Thank you.
It will be interesting to see what other devs do as well.
Care to explain why not?
Damus just can't block the scammer's account. I don't want the swindler to follow my account, and I don't want the swindler to leave a message.
This is also a defect. There are too many liars who have messed up the software.
The so-called freedom is nonsense. Nor can it.
#[2] how would Twitter and Bluesky become nostr clients if there is no delete on other popular nostr clients?
They could run own relays and support deleting and/or only connect their client to relays which “pinky promise” to delete notes upon request I guess.
#[2] what about you? This sounds like a interesting feature to consider and communicate
is a delete possible in the Nostr protocol?
