#[0] #subscribe
@nossence #subscribe
Like when they are as tall as the scroll view and scrolling haha 🤢
Nice one!
These embedded screen recordings are trippy though
What client are you using?
Native 2.0 LFG 🚀
To answer the first question more directly: Social consensus is adequate for deciding whether to merge a PR whether that happens over Nostr or elsewhere.
I’m thinking that a chain of commits signed by authors may only be merged into the “mainline” by maintainers, the merge commit will be signed by one (or more ?) maintainers. A list of maintainers and the repo/fork’s URI can be written into the git tree such that anyone can verify the repo state without looking at any nostr event.
To find the top commit, you verify the repo state communicated by the relay that you have decided to trust or that you are running.
What do you think? What am I missing?
I've sent "exclusive" notes to 242 different relays taken from https://nostr.watch/ with my profile. How many did you see?
12
I’m very much in confluence with https://github.com/nostr-protocol/nips/pull/223
Good overview nostr:note10n205weqjveqmarhua4ewx58xurmv3majp3rlqjvjl5ldkm54mvq8f32h5
Yeah I keep seeing things trying to use chains of Nostr events as distributed consensus. But what’s the point? Git already does that very well. I am trying to write up a proposal based on this presupposition.
So only the first time broadcast to initiate a private conversation with you is ever leaked? And I just discard everything if I later decide you are compromised?
Is it even possible to sufficiently obscure the handshake phase?
First person to integrate Nostr and Simplex gets to set NIP-04 on fire 🔥 nostr:note1g5l7s2433554veddkajkqsg629e0nfpl64vjzeht8uj542lwdvhqdgcx78