reply on: @ delete posts...not a fan \ stacker news ~meta

pull down to refresh

614 sats \ 36 replies \ @Undisciplined 22 Dec 2023 \ parent \ on: @ delete posts...not a fan meta

You should be zapping content based on the value it provides, rather than being concerned about whether it gets deleted after a some time.

This is the crux of the issue for me. I abandoned reddit for Stacker News. One of the things I really like about this format is being able to dive into a conversation that may have happened long ago and learn from it or contribute to it. Unlike face to face conversations, these conversations are immortal and living (or at least I prefer them to be).

I'm definitely not judging what you value about Stacker News, but it is slightly at odds with what I value. At heart I'm a "let a thousand flowers bloom" guy.

Going forward, I think I'll engage with content like yours as I'm doing here: quoting the part I'm replying to so that the conversation can be followed. I also support your idea for being able to hide your username instead.

an option to hide the user who wrote the post instead of deleting the actual text could be a win-win

The more ways to enjoy Stacker News the better, as far as I'm concerned. It's a new community and we're all still learning how to coexist.

672 sats \ 35 replies \ @elvismercury 22 Dec 2023

One of the things I really like about this format is being able to dive into a conversation that may have happened long ago and learn from it or contribute to it.

Agreed -- that's the second-most special thing about SN, imo, after zapping. There's a chance for useful things to accrue and worthy conversations to unfold over time.

Going forward, I think I'll engage with content like yours as I'm doing here: quoting the part I'm replying to so that the conversation can be followed.

This policy makes sense, and I actually am a giant fan of more targeted quoting and responding; but I'm also sad at the idea of people having to do this defensively because of a privacy LARP.

Seriously, people: the nature of digital communication comes with certain technical affordances. Deal with them.

650 sats \ 8 replies \ @ek 23 Dec 2023

but I'm also sad at the idea of people having to do this defensively because of a privacy LARP.

I don't think it's a privacy LARP. Sometimes you share something and then you realize later that someone could combine this tiny little bit of information you shared about yourself with all the other tiny little bits of (known or unknown) information you shared on the Internet to build up a profile about you which can be used for all kind of malicious purposes.

At some point, you just don't want to think about "am I leaking information about me" anymore? If you care about your privacy enough, you're just going to delete it. For some, a loss of ~privacy is directly related to a loss of personal ~security (doxing being the maximum loss of privacy) so I think we shouldn't judge people who care about their privacy.

446 sats \ 3 replies \ @elvismercury 23 Dec 2023

Sometimes you share something and then you realize later that someone could combine this tiny little bit of information you shared about yourself with all the other tiny little bits of (known or unknown) information you shared on the Internet

I'm not against targeted deletions when a person makes a mistake, or says too much, or even just behaves in a way they later regret. That's part of being human. I'm against the generic deletation-as-a-course-of-action policy that some are demonstrating here.

When you publish something online, it's out. The UTXO of that utterance is spent and the key is exposed. I could write a bot in a few days that scrapes everything that appears on SN. Any adversary who cares enough about you to be digging through your words will have that info and they will have it whether or not you delete the post in a day.

This is why I call it LARPing -- believing you're safe because you're deleting everything is a fiction. If it's giving you a sense of security, you're fooling yourself. I'm not trying to be mean (@nemo) and I'm sorry you took it that way, but the only way to have the total safety some of you seem to want is to say nothing. That would be a loss for us and for you; but this current behavior isn't protecting you and it's bad for SN.

737 sats \ 2 replies \ @ek 23 Dec 2023 freebie

I'm against the generic deletation-as-a-course-of-action policy that some are demonstrating here.

I don't see this to be much of a problem right now. I can count the nyms that I am aware of that regularly delete their comments on less than two fingers. How many fingers do you need?

However, it could become a problem, yes, but I don't think it will be. If there are enough people who value evergreen content, these people will create that evergreen content themselves. As some say: "Be the change you want to see in the world"

I could write a bot in a few days that scrapes everything that appears on SN.

You could. But would you? And how would you feel about it?

Any adversary who cares enough about you to be digging through your words will have that info and they will have it whether or not you delete the post in a day.

That's part of threat modeling. Deleting comments now saves you from such a serious threat actor in the future. When something like this becomes your threat model, your past will not be as much of a vulnerability.

This is why I call it LARPing -- believing you're safe because you're deleting everything is a fiction. If it's giving you a sense of security, you're fooling yourself.

I don't think people who delete their comments believe they're safe from everything. I think they believe they are safe against their current threat model. I think they are pretty aware of what kind of level of security they gain or lose by deleting / not deleting comments.

the only way to have the total safety some of you seem to want is to say nothing.

I agree. But I guess sometimes, you are willing to sacrifice a little abstract safety for some fun if it's worth it :)

~security is not binary just like ~privacy. It's all just personal preference (and threat modeling, as mentioned).

1407 sats \ 1 reply \ @elvismercury 23 Dec 2023

This is a really thoughtful reply. A bunch of rapid-fire responses are occurring to me, but when I get this feeling it makes me alert to arguing because I'm trying to win vs arguing because I'm trying to find the truth. So I mostly won't.

You could. But would you?

No.

As some say: "Be the change you want to see in the world"

I'm trying. But not hard enough, so it's good to be reminded.

But I guess sometimes, you are willing to sacrifice a little safety for some fun if it's worth it :)

The human condition in one sentence.

I'm glad this discussion (and the other one) exist and the points that are made have been made. It will be useful as part of the ongoing public dialogue about this topic, which is bigger than SN, I think.

902 sats \ 0 replies \ @nemo 23 Dec 2023 freebie

deleted by author

11 sats \ 3 replies \ @Eobard 23 Dec 2023

deleted by author

177 sats \ 1 reply \ @ek 23 Dec 2023 freebie

I used to have the same (or at least similar) opinion on this topic as most others here seem to have though :)

But I changed my mind. We're here to serve stackers, not to steal their content the moment they click on "reply" and pretend it's completely ours now and you have no rights anymore.

33 sats \ 0 replies \ @nemo 23 Dec 2023

deleted by author

21 sats \ 0 replies \ @nemo 23 Dec 2023

deleted by author

880 sats \ 24 replies \ @Eobard 23 Dec 2023 freebie

deleted by author

1951 sats \ 11 replies \ @elvismercury 23 Dec 2023

It's already happened abundantly in my own posts; and I do it abundantly on the posts of others. If you design for it to happen, and get the incentives right, it can and will happen.

SN is not Reddit.

11 sats \ 10 replies \ @Eobard 23 Dec 2023

deleted by author

988 sats \ 0 replies \ @Undisciplined 23 Dec 2023

I'd say you're more or less right about all of your points, but SN is young and those are all works in progress.

582 sats \ 0 replies \ @satoshiplanet 23 Dec 2023

Bookmarks are great to reread posts n comments

10 sats \ 7 replies \ @needcreations_ OP 23 Dec 2023

You'd be surprised, lots of people go straight to the comments before reading the main post. I'm guilty of that sometimes, more so for videos, but sometimes articles and forum posts like these on SN too. Reading the comments can give you a quick feel of what the main post is about and you can decide if you even feel like taking the time to dig into the main post. It'd be a shame if some of the comments are deleted and the flow of the conversation is interrupted all over the place...

121 sats \ 6 replies \ @Eobard 23 Dec 2023 freebie

deleted by author

51 sats \ 5 replies \ @ek 23 Dec 2023

That's why I suggested a feature - dissociate the comment from my account instead of completely deleting the text.

This does sound interesting. We could keep deletes but have another option "unlink nym" or something.

0 sats \ 4 replies \ @Eobard 23 Dec 2023

deleted by author

view replies

445 sats \ 2 replies \ @0fje0 23 Dec 2023

@Thawne wrote:

After being an active Reddit user for years, I can assure you that people returning to old posts or commenting on them rarely happens, and I doubt that it will be any different with Stacker.news.

The more you want to make SN like reddit, the more it becomes reddit.

And we're all abandoning reddit, no?

1 sat \ 1 reply \ @Undisciplined 23 Dec 2023

I think that's too simplistic. There were things we all liked about reddit, too, or we wouldn't have been there in the first place. There's no problem with trying to reproduce and improve upon those features here.

445 sats \ 0 replies \ @0fje0 23 Dec 2023

There were things we all liked about reddit, too

Of course, you're right.

It just struck me as odd that a 4-day old account ¹ on SN was making so many references to reddit, while seemingly unaware (or maybe unappreciative?) of how often old reddit posts and comments are revisited.

improve upon those features here

That should be the aim, yes.

Excluding anonymous posts. ↩

10 sats \ 3 replies \ @needcreations_ OP 23 Dec 2023

people returning to old posts or commenting on them rarely happens

Isn't that because old posts are archived on Reddit and can't be commented on?

0 sats \ 2 replies \ @Eobard 23 Dec 2023

deleted by author

1 sat \ 1 reply \ @needcreations_ OP 23 Dec 2023

The majority of people are primarily interested in recent/fresh posts.

How would you know that? The more posts there are the more "older" posts there will be to look at and review. Would it be convenient for a user to look at these posts with a bunch of deleted content?

0 sats \ 0 replies \ @Eobard 23 Dec 2023

deleted by author

0 sats \ 4 replies \ @Undisciplined 23 Dec 2023

I'm glad SN is providing you all with that option. Most likely this is just my ignorance, but I thought you could delete posts on nostr. Does it just delete your copy of it essentially?

There's a real interest in developing mechanisms that would help resurface old content here, so I think community interest will generate something functional.

Footnotes