Nice discussion of the different architectural model:
centralized->federated->relayed->p2p
My take is that many did not really know that relay architectures were an option making the jump to p2p (i.e., self-sovereign) which got rapidly re-mixed back into federated or centralized. nostr:note1063mar49nu5edjcr8zqlgjs8zl3dlve5p74twv43sv3s9ztaykhq38vv7w
SUNDAY
MONDAY
TUESDAY
WEDNESDAY
THURSDAY
FRIDAY
SATURDAY
EVERY DAY OF THE WEEK IS NOSTRDAY!
GN
Merchant charges €13.50, it shows up in my wallet as €13.54, due to a different exchange rate provider. I authorized it anyway, because the difference was ok with me as everything is settled in sats in the background. 
Absolutely!
FWIW, I wrote and published a book, starting with Twitter, then a blog, then a published book. Seven years from start to finish. It was a fabulous experience (and exhausting).
Fiat: Infinite Money, Scarce Data.
Bitcoin: Scarce Money, Infinite Data.
Notes and Other Sh**post Twitter Replies.
#nostr
Own your own world with your own UTXOs and NPUBs
Awesome! I’ve been running the nutshell mint since its inception.Thanks nostr:npub12rv5lskctqxxs2c8rf2zlzc7xx3qpvzs3w4etgemauy9thegr43sf485vg ! nostr:note1rcp2npk2h7cehytn3tsdpltdg6squtjrdc3mmrzuae42z8fytklqvanhh7
Further to my post earlier today. 
Yep, you could describe it that way. I am already using several ‘bots’ behind the scenes to take care of zaps, payments and nostr wallet connect requests. I also have my own relay as part of my infrastructure.
How about 100% uptime infrastructure? For ‘Internet 2.0’, I realized that with relays that I could generalize NIP-47 to handle any kind of back-end api call without relying on the presence of an api endpoint, just expose an npub operating in a privileged context listening for its calls.
The current system we have is like a referee and a coach colluding on the outcome of a game. After awhile nobody trusts that the game is being played at top level.
GM
Are the Decentralization Normies Designing for the Wrong Architecture?
As many of you know, the EU is going down the path of mandatory digital identity wallets for all with its eIDAS regulation. Regardless of what you think, there is an existential power struggle going on who gets to control or bless the wallet that everyone will use. Will it be Apple/Google (the EU hopes not), will it be the EU as a whole, or the individual member states.
I believe the power struggle is due to the fundamentally wrong architecture they have chosen - the SSI model of: Issuer-Holder-Verifier. Due to this architecture, everyone wants to be the blessed app in the centre that ‘protects’ the Holder, namely the user. Now the mad scramble by states and tech giants to consolidate power on behalf of its cherished holders ( the hapless users).
What if there is another architecture?
Ever since being involved in #nostr, I got a sense that there was an alternative architecture, but did not know how to express in a way to counter the Issuer-Holder-Verifier model. Now, I do, it’s:
Event-Relay-Client
Now the relay is in the centre, but in contrast to the ‘Holder’ it’s open, transparent and replaceable, unlike the ‘Holder’ who is closed and private. Another problem with the Issuer-Holder-Verifier model is the Verifier actor. This model is modelling the solution, not the actual problem. Everybody now is trying to figure out who the ‘Verifier’ will be.
In contrast, ‘verifying’ is baked into the guts of the #nostr model of Event-Relay-Client model. Every event is a verifiable credential (to use the mainstream lingo). If your events aren’t signed, they won’t go anywhere. Nobody is a Verifier’ because everybody is a verifier. As well, Clients aren’t anything special in the architecture- you just build what you need for your users. In contrast, the ‘Holder’ implies it is special because of the important role it plays for the user, and hence a great excuse for the state to regulate to ‘protect’ the user. Relays can be argued as being ‘special’ but we all know they play a limited role and are replaceable at any moment.
So there you go.
To sum up, the Issuer-Holder-Verifier model, despite its promise, still leads a path of decentralization. In contrast, the Event-Relay-Client model does not accord any special privilege to anyone, allowing ecosystems to evolve for their own best purposes.
How about a currency that gets issued and instantly redeemed only when a transaction takes place?
What's better than tipping for great service at a Bitcoin restaurant? Giving your server her own Lightning wallet with funds denominated in the currency of her home country.
'It's not about the wallet app, it's about the monetary network.'
~ Anon developer