Thanks haha
You can reverse lookup a pubkey by finding a kind 0, getting the NIP-05 and then doing a NIP-05 lookup to get the relay. Don't shoot me.
nostr:npub1jlrs53pkdfjnts29kveljul2sm0actt6n8dxrrzqcersttvcuv3qdjynqn
Hmmm
Actually, that's a good point, nip 32 or 1984s might be the best way to do this. Petnames might be a really underrated feature of the protocol too, if more people used custom names you could show "name (most popular petname)" or something.
Data vending machines, see here: https://github.com/nostr-protocol/nips/pull/682
nostr:nprofile1qqs99d9qw67th0wr5xh05de4s9k0wjvnkxudkgptq8yg83vtulad30gpz3mhxue69uhhyetvv9ujuerpd46hxtnfduq32amnwvaz7tm9v3jkutnwdaehgu3wd3skueqprpmhxue69uhhyetvv9ujuumwdae8gtnnda3kjctvrrxmz0 am I not seeing your zap spam in coracle because I validate zapper pubkey?
Posting this from Satellite. Satellite is underrated, what a fantastic client.
I definitely sympathize with that, and don't necessarily disagree. In this post I'm thinking more broadly than the addictive, infinite scroll feeds of yore though. There are lots of forms of legacy publishing, and one form of "custom feed" might be better for one type than another.
I really like that idea, DVMs seem like a better option than the others (other than maybe a newcomers relay), since there's no in-network context about the user when they sign up.
I'm fortunate to have the reverse case, where I'm paid in bitcoin. I don't know if moving average would help much with big dips like this (assuming it's sustained for more than a couple days). I guess I should probably hedge my bets by selling half right away, but that hurts the DCAer inside me
This one's where the party is: https://github.com/nostr-protocol/nips/pull/686
What you say is true for identities native to nostr. But impersonation is a real issue for people who have a reputation outside the system (we've seen this problem crop up multiple times this week). I don't know if that can be solved by binding names, because you can always create a similar name (phishers do this all the time).
A checkmark is the right idiom, but what that indicates is not that the name is bound to the account, but that the account represents the user's idea of what that name represents. The best solution I've been able to find is to show a check mark on an account when a user is following that person. Self-authenticating, so of limited utility, but at least it's something.
Uhh whatever nip 24 is
sick burn