Comment by @ruthless • Hey
Paul I have mentioned this often:
You don’t really own your data on Lens.
For me the definition of owning is being able to restrict access if needed. On
Comments
- *"For me the definition of owning is being able to restrict access if needed"*
This is a narrow definition of "own". Ownership is mostly about proof of possession, not restriction of access. On Lens, I own my Profile and Handle as NFTs. My ownership can be independently verified on the blockchain and they cannot be taken from me.
Ownership is also about control. My content on Lens cannot be seized or censored, and I control who even has access to it.
*"On Lens anything you post will be owned by the public forever, even if you attempt to delete it."*
This isn't true. On Lens, your content (the post data) can be hosted anywhere. If you choose to use something like Arweave, then it is true, that the data is public forever, but I can choose to host my own Lens metadata on a private server and simple delete it whenever I want. the Lens indexer (API) supports refreshing metadata, so fully removing/replacing post content is supported.
*"But it comes with a huge downside which is lack of privacy and data control for the users."*
Lens provides even more tools for privacy, like encrypting posts (making them only visible to certain users), token-gating, and control over who can interact with your publications (including commenting, reacting, collecting, etc).
\--
The dictionary simply defines "own" it as possession. The blockchain proves ownership and possession of my profile and content, and my content cannot be censored at the protocol level.