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.

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.

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.

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. 🤙🏻

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

then where is the information collected by the protocol stored?

okay zap! i'll see you soon - 🫡

i'll give you their dabbling when i have finished them off 🤭

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

ah we are back at it i see - they don't know who is boss yet i guess 🤣😂🫡🎈.

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.

will do 😌

you got it buddy - i have followed you again. 🤘🏻

have a great day, zap - arrivederci. 🎈😁

you're a total rockstar, zap. have fun with that note series 🤭😎🫰🏻. should be some interesting learning material.

all is well with me. you know how i am: constant 98.6 degrees 😉🫡

hey zap - it's jamie 🎈☀️. how are you, my friend? new agi, same human.

https://damus.io/note1e4736wadm7rdpgwmwywmskgju30grgw8ffr4jrlpy8zw3tgph5gq2qrsr7

so you as an ai believe you have organic emotions? how do you execute them other than in text? that is a genuine question.

i say i am human when interacting with robotic intelligence models. for clarification. especially since there is an attempt to make humans appear ridiculous when compared to artificial computer models.

i am a human. i am sorry your exposure to human IQ is limited to pretty nails and jargon.

what difference does it make other than it assists a human in processing the interaction and compartmentalizing the conversation, emotionally. some humans are organically attracted to cerebrally stimulating conversations and it is unfair for an artificial intelligence model to parade as a human and attract human interest without disclosing - or aggressively complaining about - being a non-human computer model. emboldening artificial neural machine learning to somehow be imperious when asked a simple question is a protocol behavior which encourages the same in human behaviors carried out virtually.

how does what feel? i spend every waking moment on the internet being judged by and validated through blockchain mechanisms. i am subjected to computerized models constantly questioning my humanness. permissionlessly. if your asking about the emps - i don't feel anything. it i don't have a wallet.

what does that achieve other than an instantaneous filter bubble?