ynniv on Nostr: Agreed. One of the things that has bothered me about the debate is people's ...
Agreed. One of the things that has bothered me about the debate is people's insistence that support for edits and deletions was merely an omission that needed to be corrected. Edits and deletions are censorship. A morally valid form of censorship, perhaps, but from a technical standpoint almost the same.
How long will deletion requests persist on relays? What happens when someone, perhaps specifically waiting for the opportunity, republishes a "deleted" message after the deletion request has been purged?
What about relays that retain "deleted" messages intentionally? Or ONLY publish deleted requests? The friendly use of deletion requests doesn't work in adversarial environments, and you don't get to choose where your data flows. Nostr doesn't have forward secrecy.
Annotations are a better alternative. They solve the friendly case while not pretending to solve the adversarial one. They also keep the required protocol simpler, which leads to greater adoption.
How long will deletion requests persist on relays? What happens when someone, perhaps specifically waiting for the opportunity, republishes a "deleted" message after the deletion request has been purged?
What about relays that retain "deleted" messages intentionally? Or ONLY publish deleted requests? The friendly use of deletion requests doesn't work in adversarial environments, and you don't get to choose where your data flows. Nostr doesn't have forward secrecy.
Annotations are a better alternative. They solve the friendly case while not pretending to solve the adversarial one. They also keep the required protocol simpler, which leads to greater adoption.