Avatar
Brett Phillips
1b00243ff044273d8e46cfd75ab37f2951cfa8fb6647b3beebabbada625b6e60
Brett I. Phillips My initials are bip šŸ¤” I like to play devil’s advocate and take the contrary position.
Replying to Avatar calle

On Multinut payments by nostr:nprofile1qqsywt6ypu57lxtwj2scdwxnyrl3sry9typcstje65x7rw9a2e5nq8sprpmhxue69uhhyetvv9ujuumwdae8gtnnda3kjctvqydhwumn8ghj7un9d3shjtnzd96xxmmfdecxzunt9e3k7mgpp4mhxue69uhkummn9ekx7mq9hxafw

"Imagine having to pay a landscaper for doing work and you have money on Cash App, Venmo, and PayPal, all of which you don't fully trust. However, you keep a small balance on each of them just in case you need to spend between friends or with certain vendors. The landscaping bill is a bit heftier than it typically is, so instead of sending funds from Cash App, Venmo, and PayPal to your bank account to then pay the landscaper instead, you combine part of the balance from each application to pay the singular invoice the landscaper has provided you. That is essentially what has just been launched on the Cashu protocol.

...

Most are completely missing it, but the cypherpunk future is being built out right before our eyes."

https://www.tftc.io/multinut-ecash-payments/

Can’t wait to see this merged to cashu.me

It’s because this is an institutional and corporate treasury game now. Retail, who are the ones googling, are not even a blip on that radar this go round.

Even more better, bake them with her.

nevent1qqs2yz6224gh82vc88caa0rk5sspykfn8s0gr32n3y84yh278awqlecppemhxue69uh5qmn0wvhxcmmvckyqwm

Should I modify nostr:nprofile1qqspcm9j9xtt42lfyx7dghytvgfm9k4sjmuguja9v7x585v45xrg25gpzemhxue69uhhwmm59ehx7um5wgh8qctjw3uj7l96qqk to only post massive losses?

Right now it posts any loss over 1 BTC, and I get a lot of feedback that it posts too much

But I also get a lot of feedback that people like it as is

I like seeing it at all levels but maybe you create a second bot which is only massive losses. @rektbotmaxpain

Replying to Avatar Ralphie

A recap of the OP_RETURN "debate"

------

Core: Filters don't work.

Bitcoiners: They obviously do, otherwise you wouldn't need to remove them.

Core: We don't have the technical means, so we're removing the limit.

Bitcoiners: We gave you the technical means in a PR two years ago, Core rejected it, it was implemented in Knots and it works.

Core: We can't stop all spam reliably, so why bother?

Bitcoiners: Because life is not black or white, and fastening your seatbelt when driving a car is safer even though some people die in car crashes.

Core: Here's 7 transactions that even your precious filters didn't catch.

Bitcoiners: Here's 2 million transactions that were caught.

Core: You can't censor valid transactions just because you don't like them. They paid a fee!

Bitcoiners: There's millions of Nigerian princes contacting people through email every day. These are "valid transactions" too, yet you send those to spam. This is obviously not censorship, so that argument is deceitful and intellectually dishonest.

Core: What is spam objectively anyway?

Bitcoiners: The receiver - not the sender - gets to decide what's useful to them. You're removing the ability of nodes to decide that, implying you know best.

Core: These transactions will end up in blocks anyway, and we can't incentivize profit-seeking miners to go out-of-band.

Bitcoiners: It's not your job to incentivize or deter miners. Your job is to work on the Bitcoin client while prioritizing the one thing that makes Bitcoin unique and truly decentralized: nodes.

Core: But we want better fee estimation and block propagation.

Bitcoiners: So do we, but never at the expense of decentralization and self-sovereignty. Nodes run the show.

Core: This is a technical discussion. Stop philosophying and using analogies, you plebs!

Bitcoiners: We gave you a technical solution that works, the philosophic rationale and the logical arguments. Stop turning Bitcoin into a shitcoin.

Am I missing anything here?

-------

If you're seeing bias here, it's because you're too stubborn to admit that one side is clearly more informed, rational and morally calibrated than the other.

This is why there's distrust in Core. It's got nothing to do with technical competency and rational discourse. It's just pure and simple political shenanigans, whataboutisms, strawman arguments and in some cases sheer lies.

- Hodling like i mean it

A key point that I think is being overlooked in the debate it the difference between developers and maintainers of the project.

Developers are free to do as they please, write whatever code they want, and to submit whatever pull request they want.

Maintainers are supposed to only be stewards. They should not merge code that is has mot gained general consensus among users of the codebase.

If developers really really want to remove the OP_RETURN filters, they should be the ones forking bitcoin-core and pushing for its use. Only then after sufficient acceptance should it be considered for merging back into core.

tl;dr bitcoin-core should not be the bleeding edge of development but should be the slower, hardened and measured approach to change.

Replying to Avatar Elvis Nuno

No. It’s not. And yes, Ben Franklin HAD to be self taught, because he didn’t grow up in a rich aristocratic family.

Benjamin Franklin played a *critical* role in shaping early American public education through his advocacy, innovation, and institution-building. He emphasized instruction in English, modern languages, mathematics, science, history, and practical subjects like accounting and agriculture-preparing students for business, public service, and civic life, rather than solely for the clergy.

Franklin started the Academy of Philadelphia, which became the College of Philadelphia in 1755 and later evolved into the University of Pennsylvania. This institution was revolutionary in being independent of church and state, focused on preparing students for practical careers, and included innovative features such as teacher training and the nation’s first systematic instruction in medicine and botany.

Thomas Jefferson was a pioneering advocate for public education in the United States, believing that an informed and educated citizenry was essential for the success and preservation of democracy. He proposed a comprehensive system of free, publicly funded education for all (free) children, regardless of social class or wealth, as a means to equip citizens with the knowledge necessary to safeguard their rights and prevent tyranny.

The founding father’s effectively invented the idea of public education as we know it today.

The single most critical and important tool in creating a state that could operate independently of the church — rather than the church being the state, and arbiter of who would (or could) receive an education, and to what point.

And the creation of public educational institutions was not only one of their proudest accomplishments, it’s what created modern America.

Public education is what created a country where people came from all over the world to study at our schools, and many stay here and create everything from modern industrialization, to the internet, Apple, Microsoft, and Google.

To be against something that is such a *huge* part of the country and world we live in today is absurd.

ā€œā€¦focused on preparing students for practical careersā€¦ā€

ā€œā€¦knowledge necessary to safeguard their rights and prevent tyrannyā€

Replying to Avatar calle

Holy shit it's working! Paid a 100k sats Lightning invoice from two different Cashu mints at the same time.

Enter atomic multinut payments.

https://video.nostr.build/935d5c453c00ae7498be116b9c4d4b358d326854fd7cf19ebfa782f69a575a6c.mp4

All Cashu wallets let you use multiple mints. To reduce rug risk, we encourage users to leave only small amounts on each mint. This introduces a big UX challenge which forces users to distribute funds on different mints in a smart way. It's particularly problematic when you're trying to pay a bigger Lightning invoice from your small balances. Who has time for that?

The Lightning protocol allows nodes to split a single payment HTLC into multiple parts to increase the chance of reaching the destination, called Multi-Path Payments (MPP). Typically, that's done from one sender to one receiver. What if... you can just break the rules?

A multinut payment originates from multiple Lightning nodes to pay a single invoice, atomically. Even if none of your mint balances can cover an invoice, as long as your total balance is large enough, you can pay the invoice.

I don't think anyone was crazy enough to do this before. Pretty sure what you see here is the first invoice being paid using a CLN and an LND node at the same time. Amazing work by the team, special thanks to nostr:nprofile1qqsw8lr88lzln8x92ng073m4v72kglf9edhxvk8eztg3ftny98f46dgpz4mhxue69uhkummnw3ezummcw3ezuer9wchsz9mhwden5te0wfjkccte9ehx7um5wghxyctwvshsz9mhwden5te0wfjkccte9ec8y6tdv9kzumn9wshsk9y93w.

https://video.nostr.build/b9e330fbe21a772c0525ae2fceedaa99a90b8512a501c1f1d3263eac1d55219a.mp4

nostr:nprofile1qqs9pk20ctv9srrg9vr354p03v0rrgsqkpggh2u45va77zz4mu5p6ccppemhxue69uhkummn9ekx7mp0qy2hwumn8ghj7mn0wd68ytn00p68ytnyv4mz7r4hv7r when do you think this will be available in the PWA?

nevent1qqs0q3y69zzwnxfq63xhx2kcgtprtrsfm0q22ms9a7kxyv7tpdhnucgpz3mhxue69uhkummnw3ezummcw3ezuer9wc0ld0ff

True. I suspect it will be tougher to maintain and also functional participate with older versions over the next decade without a fork of the respository…or some hero who starts back-porting features.

Can I zap a Pull Request?! #asknostr