Same goes for zaps
#[0]
Always has been.
Even with emails, messengers, and other "pushy" apps.
Why embed the innate loss of privacy in the word meant to mean "sending sats"?
Why self-attack? Why prime future bitcoiners with a faulty mental model, lens and bias, whereby sending sats = posting form whom, to whom, how much, when?
Why accept this new memetic paradigm that's distracting newbies from the simple fact that zapping and sending via LN are two completely different things, with different effects, incentives and in the end, effects?
Why zap and not just send a LN tip?
Pubkeys who were active, but posted nothing in the past 1m / 3m / 6m?
cc #[0]
IMO such experiments are great and we should have more of them.
Not a big fan of zaps or zappr, but the "pushing to the limits" of the protocol and clients, intentional or not, was awesome.
Never heard of blastr, but can confirm NIP 65 is powerful.
In my case, it lets me configure a bot by just giving it one "seed relay". From there, it looks up my kind 10002 Relay List and starts listening for commands on those relays.
Cool thing is that it's self-adapting. My client can publish a new kind 10002 list, then all other clients (bots) who follow can update their relay list on the fly.
Part of a relay membership could be allowing non-member pubkeys to post reactions to the paid member's events.
Two sided problem IMO.
Sender: It should be possible to "reply to all", but also only "reply to some"
Receiver: it should be possible to prioritize notifications, or maybe even "group them", make them less distracting if they're a "reply to all", or by some other client-defined rule.
Both cases are worth exploring, especially the second (if mobile gets compromised, you can still get the "signer" to stop signing via some other way).
Because of # of tags or general event size?
A 2-of-3 multisig would be interesting. You control one key on the phone, a second key by a trusted bot (running on your node at home and auto-signing events based on rules), and a 3rd key offline as backup.
The only trick then is that the "multisig pubkey" is the actual profile pubkey.
Don't see a reason why it wouldn't work.
Not sure, haven't looked into that.
I imagine app developers could do 1-tap zaps directly in the apps without much trouble.
Already possible: #[0]
Not zaps per se (LN tips are sent, but remains private between sender and receiver)
Works with every Nostr client. Bot sends sats automatically each time you click like on a note.
Configurable amount of sats.
Bot sends them as soon as you like a note.
Non-custodial. Private. Works with every Nostr client.
Yes
#[0]
Not zaps tho (LN tips sent, but no metadata posted publicly)
That's basically wash-zapping, which will always be possible.
#[0]