Which is why using a 3rd party to "verify" makes more sense to me 😃

Idk but it seems somewhat random to me. If you look closely when making a purchase or deposit from a bank account they do mention that it will be available for withdrawal in 5 days or something but still I can almost always withdraw instantly.

It’s probably some kind of a risk management thing that triggered because it’s a larger amount?

I don’t make the rules, I make the memes.

with a discount, please do some research

before segwit spam had to compete with legit transactions for space. The witness discount was core basically saying "ok you can spam, but put it in the witness section so it doesn't bloat the utxo set.

And then taproot took out the witness limit and now our blocks are full of dickbutts.

Personally I'm of the opinion that if spam had to compete for blockspace on an even playing field you would see a lot less of it.

The moral of the story, especially with taproot, is that when you start fucking around with "perfect money" all you can really do is make it less perfect....

If it aint broken, dont fix it.

Both of them are true. 4mb blocks can contain a lot more spam than 1mb blocks and the witness discount made it cheaper

No one said Segwit allowed spam, it simply made giant blocks full of it possible and added financial incentives to do it.

Taproot didn’t do anything to help shitcoins, I don’t know how that became a popular trope about all of this. In fact, despite it not being used, taproot is how you could do that stupid garbage without it bloating the blockchain at all.

The only bit thing with soft forks that gave a lower cost to inscriptions that were fully printed onto the chain was the Segwit *discount,* which wasn’t even really about Segwit itself, but was simply what was done to get a compromise blocksize increase during the shitstorm of a war that had gone on for 4 full years.

^share please

eh not really. use paid relays and spam goes away for the most part.

first

Everyone who replies to this note will get absolutely nothing

how to verify nostr ?

Do any clients factor 1984 reports into their web of trust score? I think I may include that in the nostrdb wot implementation. Impersonation/spam reports seem ideal for this. Maybe seems obvious and not sure why I just thought of that.

I guess I should specify that I’m open to a different approach wherein using Nostr keys and some other key (gpg) a user can mutually sign.

That is, the user uses Nostr to sign a message declaring ownership of the gpg key, and the gpg key to declare ownership of the Nostr identity. Only someone with both keys could do this.

Curious if anyone has written up a specification for this approach, which would allow Nostr follows to bridge into web-of-trust for, say, binary attestation with gpg.

So for example. I recently got Qubes OS. Downloaded the iso through BitTorrent, then validated against their signing key, which I had to download and install separately.

Could this process be made simpler by having a Qubes OS nostr identity which co-signed the gpg key proof? Then as long as I follow someone who transitory follows Qubes OS on Nostr, a UI could show me the trust graph and I could approve it (or something).

One real, and one imaginary