4 ms·

> - the ability to delete one's own message, and have that deletion propagated > - the ability to delete other peoples' messages, and have that deletion propaga

> - the ability to delete one's own message, and have that deletion propagated > - the ability to delete other peoples' messages, and have that deletion propagated That means you are asking for control over other people's computers and what information they are allowed to display, i.e. DRM. It is also a falsification of history. > - the ability for all participants in the community to see messages in the same format, including code blocks with syntax highlighting, images, video links, and web embeds That excludes people with text interfaces.

johncolanduoni 8y ago
Is it DRM when a moderator deletes a post on a phpBB forum? Or does it only count when it's on Slack?
- snazz 8y ago
  If a complete copy of all messages sent were on your computer and the administrator had the ability to delete this data from your computer whenever they want, I consider that to be an infringement on the control I expect of my own computer. On the other hand, the contents a phpBB forum (or even HN) are stored on someone else’s computer and no one has the ability to arbitrarily delete stuff that I’ve downloaded.
  - zapzupnz 8y ago
    > an infringement on the control I expect of my own computer How is it an infringement? The server saying 'so-and-so sent a message, here it is' is exactly no different to the server saying 'so-and-so deleted their message, get rid of it'. You can always take logs > On the other hand, the contents of a phpBB forum (or even HN) are stored on someone else's computer and nobody has the ability to arbitrarily delete stuff that I've downloaded Yet, when you consult that forum, you're in the exact same position as you would be with Discord after someone has deleted a message — you cannot consult that content anymore unless you've explicitly backed it up (in the case of Discord, made your own log; in the case of a forum, downloaded or archived the relevant site elements).
- deleted 8y ago
  [deleted]
j1elo 8y ago
I'm not sure about the delete other peoples messages, and have that deletion propagated, but having the possibility of deciding over own messages it's basic and desirable, in my opinion. I've just used such a feature less than 2 hours ago, in Whatsapp. Published a secret in the wrong group, by mistake. That's the whole point of allowing editions or deletions of one's own contents: humans are fallible, and shit happens.
- coldtea 8y ago
  >I've just used such a feature less than 2 hours ago, in Whatsapp. Published a secret in the wrong group, by mistake. By this time, it's too late, anybody could have seen it, copied it, etc. Deleting it after the fact is security theater.
  - j1elo 8y ago
    The "secret" (a link to another private whatsapp group to which not everybody should enter, just for easiness of organizational purposes in an event, so not much of a critical secret) was reportedly seen by around 5 people out of 200 in the group. No one of them bothered, if they did it would mean just a bit of explanation and taking them out of the new group. By all means, being able to quickly make a correction was not too late and was not security theater. Your position is that of "if we cannot solve 100% of a problem, there is no use to solving 95%" which is clearly a false dichotomy. There is value on editing or deleting messages after the fact of sending them. Case in point, I just edited this message to change all "_" to "*" to make italics work. That's another use: fixing wrong assumptions about usage of technology itself.
    - coldtea 8y ago
      >Your position is that of _if we cannot solve 100% of a problem, there is no use to solving 95%_ which is clearly a false dichotomy. No, my position is that if 5% of a problem (5 out of 100 people seeing it) is equally catastrophic as 100%, then it makes no sense to differentiate, which is a very true dichotomy. The fact that just 1 person that's not supposed to see it seeing it can do damage, makes the problem a binary and not a spectrum.

johncolanduoni 8y ago

Is it DRM when a moderator deletes a post on a phpBB forum? Or does it only count when it's on Slack?

snazz 8y ago
If a complete copy of all messages sent were on your computer and the administrator had the ability to delete this data from your computer whenever they want, I consider that to be an infringement on the control I expect of my own computer. On the other hand, the contents a phpBB forum (or even HN) are stored on someone else’s computer and no one has the ability to arbitrarily delete stuff that I’ve downloaded.
- zapzupnz 8y ago
  > an infringement on the control I expect of my own computer How is it an infringement? The server saying 'so-and-so sent a message, here it is' is exactly no different to the server saying 'so-and-so deleted their message, get rid of it'. You can always take logs > On the other hand, the contents of a phpBB forum (or even HN) are stored on someone else's computer and nobody has the ability to arbitrarily delete stuff that I've downloaded Yet, when you consult that forum, you're in the exact same position as you would be with Discord after someone has deleted a message — you cannot consult that content anymore unless you've explicitly backed it up (in the case of Discord, made your own log; in the case of a forum, downloaded or archived the relevant site elements).
deleted 8y ago
[deleted]

j1elo 8y ago

I'm not sure about the delete other peoples messages, and have that deletion propagated, but having the possibility of deciding over own messages it's basic and desirable, in my opinion. I've just used such a feature less than 2 hours ago, in Whatsapp. Published a secret in the wrong group, by mistake. That's the whole point of allowing editions or deletions of one's own contents: humans are fallible, and shit happens.

coldtea 8y ago
>I've just used such a feature less than 2 hours ago, in Whatsapp. Published a secret in the wrong group, by mistake. By this time, it's too late, anybody could have seen it, copied it, etc. Deleting it after the fact is security theater.
- j1elo 8y ago
  The "secret" (a link to another private whatsapp group to which not everybody should enter, just for easiness of organizational purposes in an event, so not much of a critical secret) was reportedly seen by around 5 people out of 200 in the group. No one of them bothered, if they did it would mean just a bit of explanation and taking them out of the new group. By all means, being able to quickly make a correction was not too late and was not security theater. Your position is that of "if we cannot solve 100% of a problem, there is no use to solving 95%" which is clearly a false dichotomy. There is value on editing or deleting messages after the fact of sending them. Case in point, I just edited this message to change all "_" to "*" to make italics work. That's another use: fixing wrong assumptions about usage of technology itself.
  - coldtea 8y ago
    >Your position is that of _if we cannot solve 100% of a problem, there is no use to solving 95%_ which is clearly a false dichotomy. No, my position is that if 5% of a problem (5 out of 100 people seeing it) is equally catastrophic as 100%, then it makes no sense to differentiate, which is a very true dichotomy. The fact that just 1 person that's not supposed to see it seeing it can do damage, makes the problem a binary and not a spectrum.