we need less components in a zap not necessarily more.
onboarding new users is one issue, having reliable zaps another one. That's not only about reliably sending/receiving. but also about publishing zap events.
for that a nip-60 wallet does not solve anything.
maybe making the zap == cashu token transmitted through nostr, claimable by the recipient would solve something. (but that would then also require everyone to support cashu)
(btw. would be nice if mints always return preimages )
NIP-61 zaps fix this
zap == locked nut
One issue I'm running into when implementing this is that you need access to the locked privkey to redeem the ecash.
If the ecash is locked to a key that you encrypt with NIP-44 and store on nostr you run into the issue of many (most?) extensions not implementing NIP-44. If the ecash is locked to your nostr key then you need that privkey.
This kinda sucks for web clients that don't allow nsec login unless I'm missing something.
the p2pk locking key is stored as an event on the relay nostr:nprofile1qqs04xzt6ldm9qhs0ctw0t58kf4z57umjzmjg6jywu0seadwtqqc75spz4mhxue69uhhyetvv9ujuerpd46hxtnfduhsz9mhwden5te0wfjkccte9ec8y6tdv9kzumn9wshszxnhwden5te0wpuhyctdd9jzuenfv96x5ctx9e3k7mf0dv4ph5
Yep, the problem I have is that the extension I use does not implement NIP-44
you mean a browser extension? what extension are you using?
Yep I use nostr connect
nostr connect the iOS app that implements NIP-46?
The extension https://chromewebstore.google.com/detail/nostr-connect/ampjiinddmggbhpebhaegmjkbbeofoaj
oh, there's no technical reason to not support NIP-44? pretty much everything that can is transitioning to NIP-44; I'd say the extension should implement NIP-44 tbh 🤷♂️
Which extensions don't implement nip44?
would just require every nostr client to handle it with an internal or external wallet and require every wallet to implement cashu.
which is btw. kinda why I still think every user should be able to be a mint. 🤔
