RFC: ImmutableData deletion support

I think this is a misconception

There will be a significant amount of videos stored privately that may also have been uploaded by some one else. Maybe they didn’t know it exists publicly, or simply uploaded by another. Some may just upload the video into their private collection because they couldn’t be bothered searching through public data, or consider their tastes as rare, but more than 200 other people have the exact same tastes and thoughts. So some vids upload privately are actually 199 duplicates of the first uploaded privately.

The point PRIVATE != unique.

In fact APPs will be written to check if some public uploads are duplicates by encrypting the first 3 chunks and checking if they exist on SAFE. So just because there is only one copy uploaded doesn’t mean its the only use of the file


This is also a misconception

Back to the example of a contractor producing data (eg the latest logo designs) and he gives the client the data map by some means. It could even be sneaknet so SAFE never knows the datamap was copied. The contractor then says well I don’t want that anymore and “delete” So is the client going to find the works he paid for disappear???


Basically you cannot identify deletable data by its method of upload or the number of times de-duplication occurred. There needs to be a well defined method the uploader can identify the data that can be considered deletable. Maybe a “TEMP” flag that is reflected in the datamap so anyone who receives the datamap KNOWS the file is Temporary


Another misconception and a huge one.

NO NO NO wrong.

Back to my very simple example that we can see with the logo competition. Data file produced/created by “A” is sold to “B” and datamap given by a means that SAFE cannot track (messaging, sneakernet, etc) so in fact now “B” is a legal owner of the private file created by “A”. “A” decides to delete it, but has been paid by “B” and is not the rightful (morally) owner.

If the datamap indicated its a temp file then “B” knows to reupload it, or maybe the network can charge a “PUT” to remove the temp flag by a person who has been given the datamap.


Isn’t this losing anonymity by a thousand cuts

Maybe OK if file is uploaded as a temp file, since its expected to be deleted soon and thats the price one has to pay for the feature (potential minor anonymity loss)

But NOT for every file


TL;DR

Do not make automatic, but allow users to mark files as temporary and these can have a incentive of returning at least one PUT (& max 3) to their balance when deleting the file. One put if file one chunk, 2 if file > 3 chunks and 3 puts if file > 6 Chunks.

It has to be that uploads that are intentionally marked as temp because datamaps WILL BE shared outside of SAFE “monitoring” and some (or many) times morally changing the person the file is for (owner but not in attribute sense but morally, legal sense)

6 Likes