14 ms·
This is cool. But on the other hand, it's not the way the world was intended to be. If someone sends you a nasty message which they immediately delete: then isn
by anonu 4y ago
This is cool. But on the other hand, it's not the way the world was intended to be. If someone sends you a nasty message which they immediately delete: then isn't the world a better place? It's a somewhat philosophical and moral question...
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- userbinator 4y agoit's not the way the world was intended to be. What? History should always be immutable; let's keep it that way. If someone sends you a nasty message which they immediately delete: then isn't the world a better place? No, I think it's better to just apologise for your past actions. It's a somewhat philosophical and moral question... Agreed.
- anonu 4y ago> History should always be immutable; I feel like you're agreeing with my point. Capturing a deleted message that you would never have seen is effectively changing history.
- userbinator 4y agoCapturing a deleted message that you would never have seen is effectively changing history. No, if it's sent then it's sent.
- kfrzcode 4y agoHistory is anything but immutable... The past, however, is immutable. History is the story told by the prevailing parties over generations of violent conflict
- quickthrower2 4y agoThe human mind does need privacy and the assumption that something you say wont last forever, go to a select group only or you can deny it or people forget is ingrained in our social hardware. Then comes along computers and all that is out the window!
- ghusto 4y agoWhen I see a message pop up that gets deleted before I get a chance to read it, I'm left wondering for ages what it could have been. I'm generally of the opinion people are free to say (almost) whatever they like to me, and deal with the consequences. Virtually though, I guess it's a little different. People type things they wouldn't say face to face, so maybe being able to delete them before they're read is the fix for that.
- trasz 4y agoQuite the opposite, it’s precisely how things are intended to be - and pretty much always were. The law states clearly that correspondence belongs to its recipient.