probably. getting tls termination right on a raw tcp stream is the tricky part
Had some new blood deploy an OHTTP Relay yesterday. Access to many resources Bitcoin and beyond are about to level up privacy.
Congratulations to you
Prediction markets should be sats denominated. What’s blocking this?
I think I confused MASQUE requirements with OHTTP requirements. Big if true.
afaiu WebSocket unfortunately isn’t actually HTTP, but a hack to get TCP communication working that breaks out of HTTP semantics. MASQUE requires data to be sent in HTTP.
It’s a protocol, we can set up our own MASQUE relays and use them within the app. I’m not sure if you can use apple’s. If you can it makes sense to use that for users who have an iCloud subscription . nostr:npub1t0nyg64g5vwprva52wlcmt7fkdr07v5dr7s35raq9g0xgc0k4xcsedjgqv says you might not be able to. cc nostr:npub1yevrvtp3xl42sq06usztudhleq8pdfsugw5frgaqg6lvfdewfx9q6zqrkl
The difficulty with proxying arbitrary traffic like Apple does is that an attacker can flood DoS traffic behind protection. That’s why OHTTP specs 1:1 relay server to gateway server. OHTTP could even work for general Nostr if it were available over WebTransport instead of WebSocket.
OP_CAT is proposed taproot stuff.
Concatenating makes it possible to transform data to be used by both mathops and sigops within taproot script. I’m aware of no other deployed opcode that bridges these two worlds.
There is no deployed opcode that bridges math opcodes (32 bits input) with signature opcodes (>32 bits input). OP_CAT is the simplest proposal I know of that makes this, and thus simple transaction introspection, possible.
Why doesn’t Nostr have encrypted messaging on par with Signal yet? nostr:npub1jy2pa43vcr3jkwny2f9edsx0cdavzkcwqcla4qqyf03y66nxlgrq3m9p6d explains https://blog.yonson.dev/log/2024-06-vol2/
There’s such a vast creative opportunity for style between a hoodie and and a dark suit with oxfords that’s slept on. Few.
Apple is relying on Oblivious HTTP for IP address protection too, not just Payjoin nostr:note18ha4sfq5feajm3dlq7lhmlzfc26cxe0fwgt7ra29w70lsnsm6eqsfxzwkk
BIP 78 is Payjoin v1
BIP 77 is Payjoin V2 (an open draft PR)
Neither up- nor downgrade, just another flavor. Payjoin keeps details of an actual payment private from third parties. Old school equal-amount CoinJoin (including Wasabi 2) keeps earlier history private from a second party, but payments thereafter leak details.
Payjoin is an incremental change to boost the privacy of the whole network, not just for an individual.
Silent payments and payjoin can already work together. Payjoin fixes common imput ownership heuristic and silent payments fixes address reuse. ¿Porqué no los dos?
The simplest way to break the sole privacy problem Satoshi left in the whitepaper 🫱 nostr:note1zyqqdvrreedrkgmrk8tw0wm4lsjy04wwznms9gq73ums53c7sqjqccf0yu
“If you can’t be first in a category set up a new category you can be first in” — 22 Immutable Laws of Marketing
What’s mutiny’s category of one? The social features haven’t appealed to me.