đââď¸
1 what I said
2 what was blatantly misinterpreted to âdunkâ
3 who blocked me for pointing it out 
Discussion
to be fair, there are nostr client who to check signatures before presenting it⌠and devs are free to be dismissive about someone wanting this⌠but the response âitâs not a coinâ instead âI donât think thatâs necessaryâ is a large individually wrapped swedish fish red herring.
Followed you on Bluesky đ
wish I could recommend my whole following over there like I would here, but scroll to the bottom will find some cool people in the first 20 or so
Will do thanks for the tip and helping me getting started. Global looks like Mastodon.
Iâve been scrolling through wss://relay.mostr.pub which is a global feed of some of mastodon. Porn warning, but itâs not nearly as aggressive, they all happy with their server admin, they arenât all trying to capture the bluesky bgs to be what they want it to be.
What happened? Someone mistook crypto for crypto-tokens instead of cryptography?
to be fair, some mobile nostr clients donât check the signature of every note before presenting it. I donât really have a hard opinion on if that is necessary.
the mastadon guy is offering this same critique about the bluesky app⌠but instead of the dev saying âwe donât believe itâs necessary, to much for mobileâ or âcorrect it doesnât do that yetâ he takes this shorting of crypto which in that sentence, to me itâs pretty clear he ainât talking about coin, and Paul responds with âit doesnât use crypto in the coin senseâ.
itâs a dunk on someone whoâs just being a little ranty and playful in analysis of the differences between the protocols.
It just sucks cause Iâd like to see what Paulâs saying about the development of the protocol.
On nostr I probably wouldnât of I tagged Paul and just replied the guy quoting him, but replying to: module doesnât exist yet there.
Not sure why we are not checking the âevent.sigâ while the user is looking at the post?
If there are any signature validation problems, mere milliseconds later a warning could be presented to the user?
That way we can validate signatures on a low priority thread, and then cache the result?
#[3]â Would such a feature be on the roadmap?
heâs answered this valid inquiry before, Iâm pretty sure itâs a valid no. But my point is âjust because it uses signatures, its not a coinâ isnât a valid response from Paul on the same question or critique, and itâs crazy I was blocked for pointing that out.
Wrong you're all gay