I'm a paying customer of Midjourney but with every prompt I try, I bump into some weird community guideline issue. The picture I want can't possibly be against the rules and I don't know what's triggering the bot.
Who can help me with Midjourney or generally with creating a picture?
I want a robbery scene with the robber a regular young guy with just a gun (no mask, not unshaven/scars/tatoos, no prison jump suit) in the style and smiling like in the picture from ruthe.de.
The victim can be whoever but a tiny old lady with grocery bags would be awesome.
Best result gets 10ksat.
giszmo@nostrplebs.com
reply
Yeah, campaign promises are nice but we all know how politicians forget them round about the day after they were elected.
He's presenting himself as the lesser evil. I like his promises but ...
nostr:nevent1qqs8y7p4kh33sndl2dpgnjgxhwzs55kr33ulrt75yse08s6kz05qrrs23x2pa
Never trust a politician but the claimed goals here https://www.kennedy24.com/liberties are fantastic.
Could we add "Life in prison for failing to implement campaign promises"?
nip5 is just that. A pub key in a well known location on a page.
Verification please!
Please get your staff to configure a nip5 identifier with your campaign page for example. Or link here from Twitter.
It's a humongous list of speakers. At least 20 of them - mostly top developers - I'd love to meet. What more to ask for?
... and then there is the politicians, the company politicians and the shitcoiners even from within the organizers 🤮
284 speakers? Can that be right? Can you pick 284 people without getting controversy? I think less would have been better. Much less. But I will only be watching a hand full of presentations from afar anyway.
Great! I suspect others do the same but it would be hours of work to find out and match to clients. These out-of-order threads bugged me since long and I doubt it's only plebstr unless plebstr has a vastly bigger user base than I had assumed.
So I had reported a bug in Snort nostr:npub1v0lxxxxutpvrelsksy8cdhgfux9l6a42hsj2qzquu2zk7vc9qnkszrqj49 about threads being out of order frequently and I think I now understand what's going on.
When replying, most clients copy all the p-tags to notify all people that were mentioned before of the new event.
Some clients appear to also copy the e-tags verbatime.
Alice: id1, no tags
Bob: id2, tag p-id1--reply
Carol: id3, tag p-id1--reply, tag p-id2
Carol's client might "magically" show id3 as a reply to id2 because the positional first p-tag gets interpreted as the thread's "root" even though it's marked "reply" as per nip-10.
Clients that recognize marked p-tags will recognize id3 as a reply to id1.
These p-tags were meant to be e-tags.
Is nostr:npub1plstrz6dhu8q4fq0e4rjpxe2fxe5x87y2w6xpm70gh9qh5tt66kqkgkx8j closed source? I think this bug is for you:
https://git.v0l.io/Kieran/snort/issues/386#issuecomment-1663
By copying the marked e-tags with the "reply" mark, replies look like replies to the parent of the actually replied-to event.
Congratulations nostr:npub1v0lxxxxutpvrelsksy8cdhgfux9l6a42hsj2qzquu2zk7vc9qnkszrqj49, nostr:npub12rv5lskctqxxs2c8rf2zlzc7xx3qpvzs3w4etgemauy9thegr43sf485vg and all the others!
Thank you nostr:npub1trr5r2nrpsk6xkjk5a7p6pfcryyt6yzsflwjmz6r7uj7lfkjxxtq78hdpu and HRF!
nostr:nevent1qqsxpwh92fulndlvd5yku6x4rwukmx0gmxtkp2ev5yjxp4ntmsfnl7sp5f0j0
Last I checked, Muun was using on-chain transactions with every LN transaction and for small LN transactions, they loaned sats to the users as paying 500sat in fees to send 12sat wouldn't be too welcome by most.
This event contains 4 plain e-tags which by the old positional rules would be root-e-tag, reply-e-tag, other e-tags.
https://github.com/nostr-protocol/nips/blob/master/10.md?plain=1#L34
So I had reported a bug in Snort nostr:npub1v0lxxxxutpvrelsksy8cdhgfux9l6a42hsj2qzquu2zk7vc9qnkszrqj49 about threads being out of order frequently and I think I now understand what's going on.
When replying, most clients copy all the p-tags to notify all people that were mentioned before of the new event.
Some clients appear to also copy the e-tags verbatime.
Alice: id1, no tags
Bob: id2, tag p-id1--reply
Carol: id3, tag p-id1--reply, tag p-id2
Carol's client might "magically" show id3 as a reply to id2 because the positional first p-tag gets interpreted as the thread's "root" even though it's marked "reply" as per nip-10.
Clients that recognize marked p-tags will recognize id3 as a reply to id1.
Wait, you sound like you assume there's nothing wrong with Amethyst? Tagging "reply" and "root" is the now preferred way for a reason and as far as I can see, Amethyst marks events as "reply" even when replying to a different event which apparently stems from simply copying the full tag from the replied-to event.