0 sats \ 2 replies \ @didiplaywell 8 Nov \ parent \ on: The case against edits on Nostr, by fiatjaf nostr
Thank you for the clarification. Do that same limitation applies to nostr-based wikis? Because if it does then wikis should not even be proposed! Thank you for that warning
I have heard that they want to implement git on nostr too, but once again if it's impossible to be certain if all the information has been fetched, then it shouldn't even be mentioned, it's a ticking time bomb!
write
preview
4 sats \ 1 reply \ @ek 8 Nov
This whole discussion about edits only applies to kind:1 events aka short text notes:
Edits are fine in other, more specialized event kinds, but the kind:1 space shouldn't be compromised with such a push towards centralization, because kind:1 is the public square of Nostr, where all focus should be on decentralization and censorship-resistance.
reply
33 sats \ 0 replies \ @didiplaywell 8 Nov
Owwwwww got it, thank you!!! Then yes, in that context edits are a completely unneeded pushover and twitter is the proof. That does it for me, I side with Fiatjaf.
Except that I don't share his view on "we are not following the market". We absolutely ARE following the market on Nostr. That's the ONE thing we are doing with Nostr: we are making it full blown about the market. The problem with the degeneration of the other apps is that they are not about the market but about the shareholders, so the degeneration is caused because the signals of the market are not important anymore but only the signals of the shareholders, which demand specific metrics, so the apps focus on those metrics in complete disregard of the metrics the market demands.
reply