Do you want edits on nostr for short text notes? \ stacker news ~nostr

Do you want edits on nostr for short text notes?

989 sats \ 27 comments \ @ek 6 Nov nostr

I don't know where the referendum is or if there even is one so I am just creating one here.

Long-form content (the stuff you see on habla.news for example) is already editable but this is about edits of kind:1 events aka short text notes aka the stuff you probably interact with the most on nostr clients like Amethyst, Coracle, Damus, Primal etc.

Afaict, there are currently four major proposals for such edits:

However, if I may add my unsolicited opinion: I don't consider 2. to be an option for edits since it only allows to append stuff. So it's more about "additions", not edits (not sure where "annotation" came from). I have expressed my opinion in this Github comment. I know nothing about 3. and 4. which were created recently by @fiatjaf.

If you want to see the arguments of each side, you'll have to read the GH discussions.

btw, Amethyst already supports full edits but they are not interoperable in the sense that you only see the edits in Amethyst if I understood them correctly. I don’t use Amethyst so maybe someone else can confirm.

Yes42.9%

Yes but it depends14.3%

No42.9%

14 votes \ poll ended

view all related items

31 sats \ 13 replies \ @didiplaywell 6 Nov

Yes, edits are always good, as long as they are accompanied by the edit history, which I don't see difficult to implement: instead of replacing a note by another, the new note will render instead of the previous one, but both will remain tied to the same genesis event.

10 sats \ 12 replies \ @dtonon 14h

Edits are not so useful for short notes, but they add a huge complexity both at protocol level and at UI/UX level. Just talking about the latter, as you said, the history have to be kept, otherwise big problems can arise if someone changes the message after replies/reactions/zaps have been sent. But Is extremely hard and confusing to show these feedbacks connected with the proper message. In fact, no other social network supports edit. It's easier to add a comment (or an annotation, as one NIP proposes) to clarify the matter, or just delete and post the note again.

4 sats \ 11 replies \ @ek OP 12h

In fact, no other social network supports edit.

According to Vitor, you can edit on Twitter as a premium user and on Facebook and Reddit, two other very popular social networks.

Twitter allows edits (premium feature) Github allows edits. Facebook allows edits. Reddit allows edits. Even YouTube allows you to edit the video in place (paid feature).

Mastodon and Threads also seem to support edits.

otherwise big problems can arise if someone changes the message after replies/reactions/zaps have been sent

Do existing products with edits have "big problems" from this?

I just wonder if nostr can’t meet user expectations here, what other seemingly simple expectations it will not meet in the future …

Also, edits as implemented by Amethyst seem to be fine according to what I read on nostr from users.

But maybe delaying events is indeed a good compromise between UX and complexity.

30 sats \ 10 replies \ @dtonon 11h

You are right, I was hasty in saying that no social network supports them.

Let's say that those who introduced them did so later and perhaps in premium contexts (related to content producers); most likely, because it is a centralized system, there is active monitoring (done by people or by an AI) of when and how a post is changed, to see if the change is just a minor update or integration, or upsets the meaning of the post itself, including in relation to feedback received so far.

All of this is clearly not possible on Nostr, as it is permissionless and decentralized, so tradeoffs are needed, and user expectations should relate to such limitations, understanding that those who are working on the protocol often act with a broad technical view, and do not just pick and choose for personal taste, and maybe trying to be prudent as well, managing priorities. Of course, it would be important for such views to be explained to all user groups, which is no small task.

3 sats \ 9 replies \ @ek OP 11h

most likely, because it is a centralized system, there is active monitoring (done by people or by an AI) of when and how a post is changed, to see if the change is just a minor update or integration, or upsets the meaning of the post itself, including in relation to feedback received so far.

You’re saying these centralised services are auditing every single edit the moment I hit save to check if the edit "is just a minor update or integration, or upsets the meaning of the post itself, including in relation to feedback received so far" or revert the edit later and that’s what prevents abuse?

I think you’re underestimating how complicated that would be and how much they care about something they aren’t legally interested in. This argument is a stretch.

I am pretty sure if I write something on GitHub and then edit to write the opposite nothing will happen.

They are auditing the content but not the context of edits.

131 sats \ 8 replies \ @dtonon 10h

Yes, I say that, I think this control is done by measuring the potential negative effects of an update. It is not difficult for an AI to analyze the text, only when the context requires it (great exposure and many responses/reactions already recorded), assessing the underlying risks.

Btw, when you hit save, you think that the post have been updated, but often this doesn't happens in real time, it's a background process that, perhaps, include also this sort of checks.

Github is not a “social,” it is a forum with a very technical target audience in which the chances of a manipulation having profound effects at the social level is minimal, and thus the benefits of the edit function clearly outweigh the possible damage caused by a malicious edit.

My argument is that edits overcomplicate things, especially at this time of development. If you wrote something wrong simply delete the note or comment/annotate it. Maybe it's not the best solution for all, but I think it's a reasonable tradeoff.

3 sats \ 7 replies \ @ek OP 10h

Btw, when you hit save, you think that the post have been updated, but often this doesn't happens in real time, it's a background process that, perhaps, include also this sort of checks.

True, but I still think it's a stretch that this context analysis exists and is what prevents abuse. The costs vs benefits don't make sense to me. Yes, it's not difficult as in "run some software" but it still requires significant resources at scale. We're talking about indiscriminate edit context analysis.

Github is not a “social,” it is a forum with a very technical target audience in which the chances of a manipulation having profound effects at the social level is minimal, and thus the benefits of the edit function clearly outweigh the possible damage caused by a malicious edit.

It was just an example, my argument would also apply to Reddit. But "profound effects at the social level" is a good point! Since Reddit is mostly pseudonymous, it doesn't have this effect like Twitter. Mastodon, Facebook and Threads might apply though (and Twitter Premium).

My argument is that edits overcomplicate things, especially at this time of development. If you wrote something wrong simply delete the note or comment/annotate it. Maybe it's not the best solution for all, but I think it's a reasonable tradeoff.

I share your concerns, but I am more concerned about nostr staying a niche because we ignore user expectations. However, I agree, it might be too early and I definitely wouldn't say no edits are a game breaker for nostr, lol. Maybe we can agree on this:

But maybe delaying events is indeed a good compromise between UX and complexity.

Thanks for the discussion, you raised good points I wasn't aware of.

1131 sats \ 1 reply \ @dtonon 8h

In fact, maybe I overestimated these big tech circuses:

view replies

364 sats \ 4 replies \ @dtonon 10h

The cost/benefit doesn't make sense to me.

It's a supposition, I don't have first hand informations. But big tech social have huge social and legal pressures, they already have complex moderation system in place, I was not surprise if the use them in some other contexts.

I am more concerned about nostr staying a niche because we ignore user expectations

I worry about this too, it is not an easy journey. And that is why it is very important that these discussions arise to share as many points of view as possible, thank you for your accurate feedback.

Maybe we can agree on this: But maybe delaying events is indeed a good compromise between UX and complexity.

Sure, as I already replied you here yesterday I pointed out this exact alternative :)

Staying with the topic: why did SN decide to limit edits to 10 minutes and not leave them free? I suppose it was a reasoned choice; it could provide additional insights. Btw, it's a very good compromise, that unfortunately we cannot apply on Nostr.

view replies

27 sats \ 0 replies \ @oliverweiss 6 Nov

I would appreciate edits, as well as an option to delete notes/replies.

39 sats \ 4 replies \ @grayruby 6 Nov

I would like to be able to delete. Then when I screw up I can just delete and try again.

40 sats \ 3 replies \ @dtonon 6 Nov

It's already possible, I do exactly that when I screw up with a note.

0 sats \ 2 replies \ @grayruby 6 Nov

Really? I haven’t noticed an option for that in Damus or Primal. How do you do it?

40 sats \ 1 reply \ @dtonon 6 Nov

I don't use these clients, but many others have the delete feature, it's a standard one (https://github.com/nostr-protocol/nips/blob/master/09.md). I mainly use Gossip, Coracle, Voyage, and all them support deletion request.

You can also use https://delete.nostr.com.

0 sats \ 0 replies \ @grayruby 6 Nov

I will check it out. Thanks.

100 sats \ 3 replies \ @0xbitcoiner 6 Nov

It's possible someone has already considered this, and it might seem foolish, but maybe it could be edited for a certain amount of time?

21 sats \ 2 replies \ @dtonon 6 Nov

You cannot enforce that, technically.

100 sats \ 1 reply \ @ek OP 6 Nov

You could by delaying the event like we do for zap undos. Clients delaying events has been suggested as an alternative for edits on protocol level in the GH discussions.

90 sats \ 0 replies \ @dtonon 14h

I agree ;) https://njump.me/nevent1qqsgc7zu8nn9dzcpusyaxulmqkxgtfc3jau5pm5he5mn77a9452swngpz4mhxue69uhhyetvv9ujumn0wd68ytnzvuhsygrmmmmmugka3evlgcqwq3922wsul966nhrayl04svauwldhsjjcq5psgqqqqqqsllzvun

But this is a client feature, more of a UI trick; I suppose the OP was suggesting a protocol restriction.

50 sats \ 0 replies \ @realBitcoinDog 20h

Obviously more features is better.

But what I really want is instant loading times like I get on SN and Twitter. And u want instant loading ppl I mention so I don’t have to wait for the official @grayruby or @Undisciplined nym to pop up before I feel like I sufficiently tagged them.

Better default relays for clients on iPhone like Primal 💯

65 sats \ 0 replies \ @DarthCoin 6 Nov

and btw I'm an anarchist so I don't vote... hahahahaha

6 sats \ 0 replies \ @DarthCoin 6 Nov

Many nostr users that where instigating to vote x or y will want to delete those notes soon. Or they will eat dicks... a lot of dicks.