?width=673&height=673
?width=673&height=673
?width=673&height=673
?width=673&height=673
excited to have a machine that will run bluestack in a couple of days, check out what’s been going on in the android world of nostr.
it’s always after I’m responsible and take out the recycling that I need a cardboard box for something.
wishing there was eurorack for mid tier hdmi switches matrixes and kvm usb switch like gear
so the letter argument is irrelevant?
nostr:note1v2ph2nc5h5a34zeda7ds55y6zgad2ahuulwrauf4pxl4fzgr7svq4894hf
Ease aside. I think civil disobedience to promote open access should be scaled based on the urgency of information. Not everything on substack has societal benefit, some is fictional entertainment or simply of personal expression. To me to distribute personal expression intended for a specific audience, else where, devalues the message of the urgency to information when those who do choose civil disobedience to distribute scientific or journalistic publications illegally, and suggests the belief that personal expression doesn’t hold value be it paywalled or in the form of a zap in an open distribution model.
I think the signed letter, special intended original for public consumption, works. I do find the fact that neither the description or any nip uses the term “rebroadcast” at all of note, not in a must or should but may sense, might be prudent due notice, but hard to come up with a counter argument.
.jpg){kind=avatar}
I also see more when I go to astraea, not sure if this is because I haven’t found a sync relays button but it works in a wabi sabi way
this helps to see the village from TestFlight damus 
I like how they constantly be subnoting each other but it’s seems to be done relatively politely and non confrontationally unlike here in the west
#nostrscript will fix this
*as the new unoriginal recipient
Although that functionality might be cool or useful, I think we do need it, lots of smart people who would be happy to come here from substack if we offered them a paywall and self hosted ownership for some of their content...
I'm mostly just curious about the legal argument that the signature of a document implies the right to reproduction in public. The signature verification seems key and what I was missing, is what gives confidence to a new unorginal recipient.
so as long as you are verifying signatures it should be kosher
More in the sense of how nostr:npub16fcy8ynknssdv7s487nh4p2h4vr3aun64lpfea45d7h4sts9jheqevshgh is configured. With a network in different jurisdictions. Along with Tor only relays as back channels. Is true I could delete whatever wanted. But others can stream from our relays. Was thinking of those services that show deleted tweets to compare.
I kinda thought lacking support for nip 9 was already a thing... according to nostr watch 368 support 09 and only 365 support nip 01 🤷♀️
it's not deleted if you still host it, and to present it that way would be disingenuous.
dumb question... I run a free relay, I accept your rebroadcasted note from a client you never used and you also haven't published to my relay directly (implied agreeing to some tos). Is this a copyright violation? Where in the protocol is this permission to host your content implied? I get this is how this all works, but shouldn't rebroadcast be mentioned somewhere at the protocol level so that's implied by the signature?