Looks good. Use gitweb for repository: https://git-scm.com/book/en/v2/Git-on-the-Server-GitWeb
Two reasons it would be helpful:
1. Multi-party bitcoin projects that are trying to use nostr for communication would leak less information.
2. Even social media interactions require messaging sometimes even if minimal. It is possible that some anon is only on nostr or didn't share other contacts.
I am trying to find a solution to improve privacy in NIP 4 by not making the recipient public. There are other NIPs that have tried fixing it but everything is too complicated.
Yes it could be done using a new KIND number.
Has anyone tried using kind 4 events without recipients or p tags?
Sorry I couldn't do it on Monday because I was not well. Will do it next week on Monday.
Bitcoin users and developers spend most of the time syncing and scanning blocks.
You can also wear a t-shirt with CIA logo on it. It will piss off more people.
I will do a livestream presentation about joinpools using OP_CHECKTEMPLATEVERIFY on Monday at 3 PM UTC using https://hivetalk.org #hivetalk
Related thread: https://xcancel.com/1440000bytes/status/1821357538899611681
Everything that uses pre-signed transactions gets improved with CTV. There is nothing complex in understanding this part.
Personally, I would use joinpool: https://gist.github.com/harding/a30864d0315a0cebd7de3732f5bd88f0
I have experimented with the idea on signet and it improves coinjoin.
I can run a bot to create & broadcast different types of CTV transactions regularly. However, it would be better if everyone tried creating these transactions themselves.
Use https://ctv.ursus.camp/simple or https://gitlab.com/1440000bytes/sandwich
Let me know if you need signet coins.
You should get involved in bitcoin protocol development and bitcoin core to understand some of the things shared in the post.
Everything looks good from outside. It's the same for every open source project.
> If the vast majority of users end up needing custodians to interact with the protocol, then controlling the direction of protocol development is irrelevant. Just control the custodians.
LMAO
nostr:nprofile1qqs9336p4f3sctdrtft2wlqaq5upjz9azpgylhfd3dplwf005mfrr9spzamhxue69uhkummnw3ezuendwsh8w6t69e3xj7spz3mhxue69uhkummnw3ezummcw3ezuer9wcq3qamnwvaz7tmwdaehgu3wwa5kueg6g89xw and nostr:nprofile1qqsw3znfr6vdnxrujezjrhlkqqjlvpcqx79ys7gcph9mkjjsy7zsgygpr9mhxue69uhhqatjv9mxjerp9ehx7um5wghxcctwvsq3samnwvaz7tmjv4kxz7fwdehhxarjd93kztnrdaksz9thwden5te0wfjkccte9ekk7um5wgh8qatz7tvu4p wrote lot of stuff about supporting decentralized coinjoin implementations in April this year after the arrest of Samourai founders.
I am sure HRF and Opensats can support contributors, maintainers etc. in this repository.
I work on a different coinjoin implementation which is simpler and works fine with descriptor wallets. However, I want to see joinmarket do better.
It's not used in Asia for anything except investment.
Previous conflicts when Antoine contributed in LDK.
So ... they decided to want a CoC. He wanted a different CoC. Nobody answered to his concerns. He kept talking to himself. The CoC got merged and applied to him, resulting in a 3m ban? nostr:npub1dz449nhzzm7f9k3n28en8xtm8nveamf97yp3pjgzwdsw7e3mcl6swlx56h is this about right?
I think he got banned because of this comment: https://github.com/lightning/bolts/pull/1207#issuecomment-2457109597
Maybe related to these links: