But again, once a client has the encrypted data and the decryption key, you cannot make them forget those 2, and thus you cannot delete your data.
This idea that "right to be forgotten" can be implemented in a decentralized solution is false.
I'm not very technical so pardon my language. Why does the client need the data and the key? Is client the same as end-user?
I understand that once a person decrypts a file, they could then copy and share that file, but I'm talking about a circumstance in which ONLY the intended person has the keys to decrypt the file. In that case, it wouldn't matter if the network still has a copy of the file, or if the originator decides to delete it from the network and some nodes refuse to comply because they'd just have an encrypted file in their node.
reply
Yes, the client code can be told to delete the data. The fact that someone could alter their client to ignore these rules doesn’t mean that you should ensure that everyone ignores them lol.
Right to be forgotten could be implemented in multiple ways, but you simply don’t care and you’re not interested. Which is why these types of products fail. Because the people that make them don’t care about UX.
reply
The right to be forgotten is pointless if you can't ensure that the data is sure to be deleted. It's not a UX problem.
reply
Again, there are ways that you can do this, but you simply don’t care. You’ve just resigned to accept a subpar UX. It’s as if you have contempt for your users or something
reply
You keep repeating you can do this, but never explain how.
reply
i’ve said how but you are unwilling to compromise on anything. you think if there can’t be 100% guarantees (impossible because we are dealing with humans), then it’s not even worth considering
reply
That's true. If you believe otherwise, ask yourself why this has not been done before.
reply
It has been done and it is being done. Just not with Nostr
reply
You keep saying things without backing them up. Just stop or throw concrete examples. I'll stop replying until you do.