If I delete my post, I want it deleted, WHO WOULD HAVE THOUGHT?

So why, when I delete a post, I see “undelete”? Who was the genius who thought of this idea as being a good one?

Thanks.

  • DomeGuy
    3·
    3 days ago

    I could almost see your point, except that “don’t show this anymore but don’t bother cleaning it up” is what “delete” means all throughout the internet. Following a tradition that goes back to BBSes, Usenet, and MS-DOS.

    Trying to delete in social media is like trying to un-publish yesterday’s printed newspaper. Maybe it’d be sensible to label the action “hide” or “declaim”, but that’s probably a whole seperate topic.

    • jaykrownOP
      22·
      3 days ago

      No. Delete means to remove from database, no recovery. Nowhere in the English language semantically will you find that “delete” implies that you can recover it. If you delete it from Lemmy, then it should be wiped, if another user saved it then there’s nothing that can really be done. As far as the hardware you are executing “delete” should follow that command.

      • DomeGuy
        2·
        3 days ago

        Delete means to remove from database, no recovery

        From a technical standpoint, this was not at all the case historically. By the time we moved from floppy disks to standard UNIX commands the presumption was that your data would be backed up and thus recoverable, and early RDBMs treated the equivalent to a DELETE SQL command the same way FAT did.

        Nowhere in the English language semantically will you find that “delete” implies that you can recover it.

        https://english.stackexchange.com/questions/518243/origin-of-the-word-delete

        Delete as originally brought into English from Latin referred to smuding out in your wax slate, and later blotting out your writing to hide a mistake. In both ancient usages the mistake was potentially recoverable, a non-contradicting inference that continued on to the computer age.

        Note that we don’t generally say “delete” to mean “remove unrecoverably” in other contexts, either. The rules for handling classified material do not merely say “delete”, but always compound it with qualifiers or expansive instructions such as “delete unrecoverably” or “delete files and backups”.

        As far as the hardware you are executing “delete” should follow that command.

        Final point: the actions of a user with regard to their posts on Lemmy are not hardware commands. They are pure software concepts that interact with a distributed and abstracted system that is several steps removed from such.

        • Ann Archy
          2·
          2 days ago

          Delete as originally brought into English from Latin referred to smuding out in your wax slate,

          You de-lete it. So it was previously leeted. Or, if you will, 13373d.

          • Assassassin@lemmy.dbzer0.com
            1·
            2 days ago

            You seem really hell bent on not understanding how any of this works. Multiple people have given great explanations on why it works that way and even the history of the word “delete”, and you just say “nah, that isn’t what I think it should be.”

            Bro, the entire issue here is that your perceptions and assumptions are wrong. If everyone else gets it and you don’t, maybe the problem isn’t everyone else. Being a dick about it certainly isn’t going to help.

            • Ann Archy
              11·
              2 days ago

              “A lot of people disagree with you” is a bad argument.

              I’m just drive by commenting and have no stake in this, but I saw that and wanted to make the statement.

              I’m not saying jaykrown is right and you are wrong, or vice versa, but it’s a bad argument.

              The most famous example would be when the nazis collected the writings of a hundred scientists to disprove Einstein because he was a jew, and Einstein replied “If I was wrong, all it would take is a single one”.

              (and then everybody clapped)

              Please note I am not taking a side, so don’t worry about telling me why jaykrown is wrong, because it doesn’t matter- “people disagree” is not a good argument.

              • Assassassin@lemmy.dbzer0.com
                11·
                2 days ago

                Dude asked a question, received a bunch of congruent answers, and chose to argue with them rather than consider that he’s wrong. That’s not even remotely equivalent to the nazis trying to disprove Einstein, and it’s really bizarre that you brought that up.

                He asked for the wisdom of the collective, received it, then decided that he didn’t like it because it didn’t reinforce his perception. “Everyone you asked disagrees” is a 100% valid argument.

                • Ann Archy
                  2·
                  2 days ago

                  I can instantly tell that you’re being disingenuous, you’re trying to protect your ego, I don’t interact with people like that. You’re a sophist. Bye.