> it's really hard for everyone in the public square that ju...

npub12a77qmwwzc9qx7gk8f9m0d5qhclq5rsudr0xu6agcqgnfdzqvnwsfrrdyd
hex
ad0e7501b73bd02f95d0e9bbce5c1e3acba900863b322ab79a5357b14fbd0170nevent
nevent1qqs26rn4qxmnh5p0jhgwnw7wts0r4jafqzrrkv32k7d9x4a3f77szuqprpmhxue69uhhyetvv9ujuem4d36kwatvw5hx6mm9qgs9wl0qdh8pvzsr0ytr5jahk6qtu0s2pcwx3hnwdw5vqyf5k3qxfhg7wrgtxKind-1 (TextNote)
↳ Reply to Event not found
a32f7206f25a224f5f6eec25209a60f47d25415825953dc9ac1a08d25e894de9...
it's really hard for everyone in the public square that just heard what you said to un-hear it, or not gossip it with neighbors and friends. The consequence of the public square.
This is what I said was the “Brain dead nostr take” way up at the very top of this convo. It’s about deniability. Stop signing each individual event and then spreading them as fat and wide as possible with no control over who can spread them.
That's an impossibility to enforce. Many relays already honor deletion events, some relays require auth and other mechanisms to help prevent leakage, but this is nearly in impossibility in any client-server network, I don't care what name is on the protocol.
This is major cope. Access control has existed since the Dawn of servers.
In the case of actvitypub I don't think anything stops me
Authentication stops you, yes.
And to clarify "impossibility in any client-server network" nip-70 doesn't prevent leakage either relays can (and do) simply ignore them.
You’re not READING what I write. I literally just told you that. I would say you’re a retard, but I think the real issue is that you just love to hear yourself talk. Go blab to someone else fuckwad.
Raw JSON
{
"kind": 1,
"id": "ad0e7501b73bd02f95d0e9bbce5c1e3acba900863b322ab79a5357b14fbd0170",
"pubkey": "577de06dce160a0379163a4bb7b680be3e0a0e1c68de6e6ba8c01134b44064dd",
"created_at": 1780928615,
"tags": [
[
"e",
"f9901260bc194e772513aa63bc4c5e4696eaaad9168d08f4d547c18e46eae264",
"",
"root"
],
[
"e",
"a32f7206f25a224f5f6eec25209a60f47d25415825953dc9ac1a08d25e894de9",
"",
"reply"
],
[
"p",
"577de06dce160a0379163a4bb7b680be3e0a0e1c68de6e6ba8c01134b44064dd"
],
[
"p",
"036533caa872376946d4e4fdea4c1a0441eda38ca2d9d9417bb36006cbaabf58"
],
[
"p",
"576d23dc3db2056d208849462fee358cf9f0f3310a2c63cb6c267a4b9f5848f9"
],
[
"p",
"32e1827635450ebb3c5a7d12c1f8e7b2b514439ac10a67eef3d9fd9c5c68e245"
],
[
"client",
"Nostur",
"31990:9be0be0fc079548233231614e4e1efc9f28b0db398011efeecf05fe570e5dd33:1685868693432"
]
],
"content": "\u003e it's really hard for everyone in the public square that just heard what you said to un-hear it, or not gossip it with neighbors and friends. The consequence of the public square. \n\nThis is what I said was the “Brain dead nostr take” way up at the very top of this convo. It’s about deniability. Stop signing each individual event and then spreading them as fat and wide as possible with no control over who can spread them. \n\n\u003e That's an impossibility to enforce. Many relays already honor deletion events, some relays require auth and other mechanisms to help prevent leakage, but this is nearly in impossibility in any client-server network, I don't care what name is on the protocol. \n\nThis is major cope. Access control has existed since the Dawn of servers. \n\n\u003e In the case of actvitypub I don't think anything stops me\n\nAuthentication stops you, yes. \n\n\u003e And to clarify \"impossibility in any client-server network\" nip-70 doesn't prevent leakage either relays can (and do) simply ignore them.\n\nYou’re not READING what I write. I literally just told you that. I would say you’re a retard, but I think the real issue is that you just love to hear yourself talk. Go blab to someone else fuckwad. \n\n",
"sig": "70d169ca41d7027e9722ba334410b50fac12af39da932ac7458fcf4103ca2e2e6f2dd1f75dd4a529d97bb05e532899aa84495bce19aba4fa2aa9f19dbb0e3081"
}