Did Robbie invite you back out to Chillderburg?
What is the status of NIP-59 support among relays?
> To protect recipient metadata, relays SHOULD guard access to `kind 1059` events based on user AUTH. When possible, clients should only send wrapped events to relays that offer this protection.
> To protect recipient metadata, relays SHOULD only serve `kind 1059` events intended for the marked recipient. When possible, clients should only send wrapped events to `read` relays for the recipient that implement AUTH, and refuse to serve wrapped events to non-recipients.
(Yes they're not REQUIRED but they improve privacy)
#asknostr
GM! Some more improvements to Coolr!
- Share links
- Welcome screen for new users
- Easier access to help
- Notification sound when tab not active
- other internal stuff
Check it out and start chatting!
https://www.coolr.chat/?relay=wss://relay.damus.io&channel=_
nostr:nprofile1qyjhwumn8ghj7cn40faxymm594ex2mrp0yhxyatvd35hx6rzda6kuare9e3k7mgprfmhxue69uhkummnw3ezuum4v3hkxctjd3hhxtnrdaksqgxfax7upvpuyx7nx7sjmn6mgc75nld0azz25y4mj5xpst57fklfhqy6fmt5 5000
Neat! Doesn't grab my nickname though, just shows my npub (using the extension). Pretty sure the relay I picked (nos.lol) should have my kind 1 on it.
"The term ‘qualified tip’ means any cash tip received by an individual in the course of such individual's employment in an occupation which traditionally and customarily received tips on or before December 31, 2023, as provided by the Secretary."
"in the course of such individual's employment" is probably the operative (and disqualifying) section.
https://www.congress.gov/bill/119th-congress/senate-bill/129/text
Humorous punctuation: https://bitcoin-irc.chaincode.com/bitcoin-core-dev/2025-05-15#1121197;
As recently as *today*, someone savvy enough to make it into IRC, and is aware the mailing list exists asked "Is there a ml post (I can't subscribe, it probably just sits in mod queue forever) which goes over the rationale/reason (from bitcoin core's view) for why op_return is to be changed (and the option to configure it potentially removed in the future)?"
Yes, handcrafted ground meat jerky (beef, bison, elk, or chicken) jerky for ₿tc / sats
My own site, https://ketolish.us/shop
and at Plebian Market https://plebeian.market/p/ketobeejay@iris.to
I can attest that it's good stuff too!
Unfortunately I don't have a prescription.
From my vantage point the information has been adequately disseminated (thanks in part to Optech) and some contingent has failed to discover or understand it.
If I *have to* offer some kind of idea, there could be an opportunity for educational content that's in the middle ground between bitcoin influencer and what optech does now (if you really want more work lol). I'd suspect 80-90% of Optech is readily understandable by most bitcoiners, but maybe that last 10-20% turns off the less technical audience?
Maybe a more reasonable improvement would be to publish the recap on youtube either with chapters or split into separate videos by topic so that people who aren't subscribed or don't regularly listen to the recap can more easily discover, pick and choose parts of optech to consume? (I know the podcast already has topic timestamps so hopefully it's not much extra work) At minimum, saying "hey listen to this podcast and go to MM:SS" is a lot more friction than a youtube link that takes you directly to the timestamp.
I guess my prescription there is to increase optech's reach so these people are better informed lol
There is a lot going on in the OP_RETURN debate, but I definitely agree with this:
"What the OP_RETURN debate has demonstrated is that Bitcoin Core and the Bitcoin technical community have not done a good job communicating their value – not to mention the rationale behind their decisions – to the average bitcoin user."
https://blockspace.media/insight/op_return-debate-the-influencers-vs-the-devs/
The Bitcoin Core developers have produced artifacts and content on these matters already, but those of us closely observing need to do a better job of disseminating that information to a broader set of Bitcoin ecosystem participants.
"The single biggest problem in communication is the illusion that it has taken place."
I need to do better.
For all of the people that flooded the github issues, it seemed like very few actually read the mailing list thread. I saw at least one person earnestly say they hadn't heard the rationale for removing the OP_RETURN limit, despite it being articulated in multiple places multiple ways.
That confusion has been actively promoted, unfortunately. Very disappointing, to say the least...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zooko%27s_triangle IMHO makes UX of anything non-centralized very difficult (namecoin-esque tech aside).
Should just do vulnerability disclosures on v(N-2) to keep people upgrading 😂
Fair enough, but stamps uses counterparty, and the counterparty FAQ says this about OP_RETURN and prunability: https://docs.counterparty.io/docs/basics/faq/#what-happens-if-and-when-op_return-data-is-auto-pruned
> Counterparty only needs some Bitcoin full nodes somewhere to have an unpruned copy of the blockchain. As every Counterparty full node is also a Bitcoin full node, this is easily done.
stamps references the counterparty behavior as the reason why stamps uses bare multisig and says
https://github.com/mikeinspace/stamps/blob/main/BitcoinStamps.md
> The length of the string means that Counterparty defaults to bare multisig, thereby chunking the data into outputs rather than using *the limited* (and prunable) OP_RETURN.
Since counterparty refutes/denies the pruning argument, it's IMHO safe to conclude that stamps is actually using bare multisig because of the datacarrier limit anyway.
Are we sure anybody is actually doing P2MS because it's unprunable, and not because of the datacarrier limit? (and/or to be jerks)
What's the threshold to make the list? 😂
nostr:nprofile1qqsqgc0uhmxycvm5gwvn944c7yfxnnxm0nyh8tt62zhrvtd3xkj8fhggpt7fy plz
No, that's not what's happening.
What you *could* say is they want to make it easier for bad actors to do a bad thing, to prevent them from doing a way, way worse thing. Kinda like leaving your car doors unlocked in the city so thieves don't break your windows.
Someone proposed to remove the data carrier limit because it caused multiple protocols to store data in unspendable outputs instead of OP_RETURN outputs. They proposed this because unspendable outputs are really bad, objectively way worse than larger OP_RETURN outputs. Even pruned nodes can never forget these unspendable outputs, they have to carry them forever, and their existence slows down every node's block processing.
A bunch of angry, low information people flooded the github discussion and the core developers overreacted and locked the thread.
nostr:nprofile1qyvhwumn8ghj7un9d3shjtnndehhyapwwdhkx6tpdshsz9mhwden5te0wfjkccte9ec8y6tdv9kzumn9wshsz9nhwden5te0wfjkccte9ekk7um5wgh8qatz9uq3kamnwvaz7tm8d3jkzum0deshgmmj9ejx2a30wfjkccteqy2hwumn8ghj7un9d3shjtnyv9kh2uewd9hj7qpqq3sle0kvfsehgsuexttt3ugjd8xdklxfwwkh559wxckmzddywnwsm55dju Do you recall if Truth Social has an API and/or exposes the old masto API? (and if I'll get b& trying? lol)