does 2fiat actually send out physical cards btw? you should note this, because virtual cards using NFC means googled phone.

all the info i can find says that graphene with google stuff installed is unreliable.

why?

What about unfollowing X entirely?

We don't have enough (any?) TUI wallets.

I want Sparrow in a TUI...or at least Electrum.

your note renders like crap, what client are you using

Signal is really frustrating and we could do so much better with Nostr.

Phone numbers, limited devices, tied to one business entity, and running unsustainably on charities.

Hope a Nostr-based solution like #Keychat and #Whitenoise will eventually replace it fully for me. Monetization is very important.

Privacy is not for free.

Any recommendation on how to migrate disks without having to redownload the entire blockchain?

Since migrating I cant get into the raspiblitz menu. Blockchain and Lightning are both synced 100% but cant geht beyond that screen

> It turns node runners into network police

It doesn't turn them into "network police" because they aren't policing "the network" (other people's computers) but only their own. I run spam filters because I don't want spam in *my* mempool. If other people want it, great, their computer is *their* responsibility.

> constantly define and redefine what constitutes spam

It doesn't constantly need redefinition. Spam is a transaction on the blockchain containing data such as literature, pictures, audio, or video. A tx on the blockchain is not spam if, in as few bytes as possible, it does one of only two things, and nothing else: (1) transfers value on L1 or (2) sweeps funds from an HTLC created while trying to transfer value on an L2. By "value" I mean the "value" field in L1 BTC utxos, and by "transferring" it I mean reducing the amount in that field in the sender's utxos and increasing it in the recipient's utxos.

> Data-embedding techniques will simply evolve to bypass the latest filters

And filters will simply evolve to neutralize the latest bypass. They cannot withdraw this race if the filtered are more diligent than the spammers.

> [What if they] make their transactions technically indistinguishable from "normal" financial ones

Then we win, because data which is technically indecipherable cannot be used in a metaprotocol. The spammers lose if their software clients cannot automatically decipher the spam.

If the spammers develop some technique for embedding spam that can be automatically deciphered, we add that method to our filters, and now they cannot use that technique in the filtering mempools. If they make a two-stage technique where they have to publish a deciphering key, then they either have to publish that key on chain -- which allows us to detect and filter it -- or they have to publish it off-chain, which is precisely what we want: now their protocol requires an off-chain database, and all of their incentives call for using that database to store more and more data.

> If a node is blind to a large segment of the real mempool, wouldn't it be slower to detect a sudden spike in the fee market, potentially causing it to fall behind in a fee-bumping war?

A fee-bumping war? I think I need more context. I am not aware of any real-world software that requires users to competitively bump their fees. Are you saying there *is* such a protocol? Are you perhaps referring to the LN attack where the perp repeatedly RBF's an input to a tx that creates old state?

Even there, the would-be victim doesn't have to repeatedly RBF anything. Instead, he is expected to repeatedly modify his justice tx to use the txid of whatever transaction the perp creates after *he* (the perp) performs an RBF. The victim *does* have to set feerate each time, but his feerate does not compete with his opponent's, as his opponent is RBF'ing the input to the justice transaction's *parent,* whereas the victim simply sets the feerate of the justice transaction *itself,* and he is expected to simply set it to whatever the going rates are.

Moreover, as mentioned above, I think it's absurd to expect a real-world scenario where Knots reports a too-low feerate for 2016 blocks in a row, despite getting information about the current rates from each of those blocks *as well as* its mempool. For that to happen, spam transactions would have to be broadcast at a completely absurd, constantly-increasing rate, for 2016 blocks in a row, with bursts of *yet further* increased speed right after each block gets mined (otherwise the fee estimator would know the new rate because it shows up in the most recent block), and the mempool would *also* have to go practically unused by anything else (otherwise the fee estimator would know the new rate when it shows up in the non-spam transactions that compete for blockspace with the spam transactions).

> On the other points we are also left with the problem that the network communication is breaking down because more nodes are rejecting the very transactions that miners are confirming in blocks.

This communication problem can be summarized as, "compact blocks are delayed when users have to download more transactions." I think driving down that delay is a worthwhile goal, but Core's strategy to achieve that goal is, I think, worse than the disease: Core's users opt to relay spam transactions as if they were normal transactions, that way they don't have to download them when they show up in blocks. If you want to do that, have at it, but it looks to me like a huge number of former Core users are saying "This isn't worth it," and they are opting for software that simply doesn't do that. I expect this trend to continue.

Another analogy is safe-needle injection sites.

BTW, those were also quite controversial for a long time.

Ocean is already the eighth mining pool and, what's more, it's decentralized mining.

Spam-free blocks, this is the way forward.

Who said it wasn't profitable to mine spam-free blocks?

> what can be the endgame here?

When you run the default relay policies in Knots you get one benefit immediately: less spam in your mempool

You also get two more subtle benefits: (1) you're not responsible for relaying most spam to miners (2) you slow down the propagation of spam-filled blocks

The latter benefit also gives spam-free blocks a relative speed boost

Even people who don't like European union interventions often say they like regulation of data roaming prices in Europe, it made roaming inside EU cheaper, you pay like at home.

I am not using an European operator, so I'm outside of this regulation. I pay somewhere around third to half of what you regulated people pay for both Europe and Americas.

Market gives better prices than regulators.