wallets do it, most websites don’t use it it seems to me
lightning: links should always have been bitcoin: links.
lightning: is not a standard protocol, bitcoin: is and safe-listed by browsers.
how do we get this to change?
Because we had the question in the Alby community call today:
Is anybody here interested in helping with maintaining the Safari build and release process?
Got some Alby questions? join our community call:
i was just going by what nostr:npub180cvv07tjdrrgpa0j7j7tmnyl2yr6yr7l8j4s3evf6u64th6gkwsyjh6w6 said that there are lots of sites now depending on it. if there are, then alby is about to break alot of websites. i'd hope alby would provide a deprecation period so people can update their sites. perhaps you can suggest that
it was ONE single website.
nothing breaks.
No there is no point in adding it. Also nothing was started here. There was a mistake in the code since the very first commit (guess insignificant enough that nobody cared so far). ONE single app has used it afaik, which was updated. There was already a change for this which will be in the next release.
see also:
note1thfe2djqkffzrghjznnzkcpd3lv3643lslfzujggtx5ugx7mmm3qa4h3er
With that said, I know these things are hard and it's easy to make mistakes. Maybe you didn't expect apps to start relying on the {created: true} response and it wasn't your intention to break other apps -- that's one of the reasons why I'm pointing out this: to warn people about these small slippery slopes.
But from nostr:nprofile1qqsrxra3gv0lnkxz2pcxh0xuq9k4f9dr7azwq3aypqtnay4w0mjzmtqprpmhxue69uhhyetvv9ujuumwdae8gtnnda3kjctvqyt8wumn8ghj7un9d3shjtnwdaehgu3wvfskueqpr4mhxue69uhkummnw3ez6ur4vgh8wetvd3hhyer9wghxuet5qq7dwn 's answer above I get the feeling that he doesn't care and thinks this is even good.
I _very_ much care about independent standards and consitency. And I guess you also know that. Everybody involved in Alby and related projects does that and spends o lot of time on it.
We wrongly return a value in a function that should not return anything. (it's {enabled:true} btw. and might even be from the time when I worked on joule)
It was reported, a PR was made and we investigated if any apps rely on it. ONE single application was found afaik that discovered and used that value. The next version will have this changed.
done.
This is also how the process should be. Mistakes are made and they are fixed.
You are right in calling this mistake out and I appreciate that!
Making it sound we intentionally break standards or break all apps or make things so that it does not work in other extensions is wrong.
There is no specific code and never will be.
We all are here for the openness, it's all open standards spec-ed by communities.
👍 :) that's the best.
that's why self-hosting NWC etc. and exactly why interoperability is imo important. users can choose what works best for them and can also switch.
totally, we're around! let's chat!
yes, so far you need to send a support email for that, we don't have this feature so far.
thanks, very much appreciated!! And yes, this is the direction that things should and will evolve within Alby.
Though on the NWC level users should still be able to use different wallets/providers. We would not want to limit it to one wallet - custodial or non-custodial.
The great thing is that people can choose what fits them best and because of NWC, WebLN, etc. things work interoperable and devs also don't have to worry about it.
👍 the budgets are kinda like separate subwallets. lnbits has access to the node.
yeah, it’s best to layer security and such protection. lnd -> lnbits -> nwc -> app. and you have security/permissions on each layer. 🔓
which account? if you use an Alby account then an email is required, yes.
but you can use anything.
my vision would even be that there are many ways in the future making the UX easy for the user. one-click, done. what do you suggest how to do it?
As an example, on the primal test flight on iOS right now, I cannot link my own LND node to the app, I can only link my alby account. I believe this is what nostr:npub1t0nyg64g5vwprva52wlcmt7fkdr07v5dr7s35raq9g0xgc0k4xcsedjgqv is referring to
So what should we do? Let's ask them how to make this happen.
We made a NWC implementation for LND, maintain a Umbrel app to easily install it there, etc. it's also all open source.
huch. you said we are going around and placing proprietary "login with alby" buttons across all nostr clients.
And I asked where this is the case, because it's a complain that I wanted to understand. There is not even such a thing as a proprietary login with Alby. We implement LNURL-Auth, NIP*, etc.
If you refer to NWC, then we experimented with different UX models, but with a focus on openness for anybody, interoperability and usability.
Nostr wins by focusing on building. Building and iterating!
Such amazing stuff is made here.
Where do we not care about specs? I think we very much push for specs and interoperability in all that we do. We might make mistakes, like here. but please let us know where things can be done better.
And the URI had the problem, that an implementation was proposed, then in the NIP it was decided to change the URL, but Amethyst had implemented it so there was a grace period to change it.
How should we have handled it better?
please let us know where we do not care about specs and where we can do better. This is actually very important to me.
and where did we make a proprietary "login with alby" button?
I thought this is how standards are started and evolved? isn't that also how nostr does things?
Which wallet do you use? You can simply send it there. What problem do you have?