Goodbye garnet, I barely knew ye.
It really is a shame. At least we have a proof of concept and a seed to start work from in the event someone wants to take up the mantle. It won't be me, I have enough on my plate already and Android development isn't something I'm experienced in, but I hope to see someone pick up the project down the road. I'll probably run it alongside amethyst I'm the future if the recent pull request for changing the app label is implemented on anotyer release.
Today I picked between Monero tipping and better experience on nostr. Having to make such a choice makes me a little sad.
#XMR #Monero
This is actually a really great idea. A NIP that has a kind which is a list of pubkeys, that any user can publish, and anyone can pull any of this kind of note from anyone and incorporate it into their spam filter. So you could say that you trust my spam filter list, or someone else's, or 5 people's, and then your client will just use it (giving you the option to not block certain keys of course) and your client might even optionally update yours so that others can use yours.
I can think of a problem with it, which is auto updating these lists will make them trend towards uniformity across the network, there's a lot of redundancy as well.
Another idea is to let relays put it in their relay information note, it updates it every time the relay blacklists a spam pub key, but the issue with that is that relays will then over time trend towards censoring people. A relay adds me to it's list because it doesn't like some opinion of mine, too many people use it and now I become undiscoverable on the network. This is dangerous, you see a similar thing happening across the fediverse.
The user blocklist idea will also enable trusted users to censor a little, but usually this will be ideologues who's followers choose to use their list because they're also ideologues, it's much more resistant to network wide censorship and network fragmentation. The danger here is that relays begin doing the blocking on behalf of users, which would probably happen to some degree anyway.
Really... What headway did you make on that endeavor? What was tricky about it? This is a topic that interests me greatly.
https://github.com/nostr-protocol/nips/blob/master/13.md
PoW is all you need
What custodial ones are there (that work with your software ofc)?
Could be ecash too either way is fine.
OK.
What wallet app out there that doesn't need me to run an LN node can be used for zaps on nostr?
I know it would be a custodian.
After samourai the alby people stopped their remote node service, lots of people doing custodial LN dropped it. I'm curious if anyone is left so I can use their services.
Let me ask you, everything I've seen about LN in a way where I don't have to run a node has been shut down since samourai. Is there anything left?
I'm still using it, but I want to test out remote signing with Amber in Amethyst. If I switch, I'm abandoning garnet and therefore Monero tipping on nostr for the time being. We literally had it, this is frustrating.
He's never going to do it.
And as great as his software is, he's not the best guy to do it. Amethyst has some very opinionated design decisions which aren't conducive to our ethos. It has a little bit of censorship baked in. That needs to be fixed in whatever client has Monero integrated, it's fine to pass around a list of spammers but people need to be able to see who is blocked and unblock them if they choose.
Is garnet dead? The excitement with which we all started tipping each other seems to have died down significantly.
#XMR #Monero
My thoughts: UI don't really care about my follower count. On a censorship resistant network you have no way to know how many of them are unique people that actually see what you say. And if what I have to say is interesting to a dozen people, I'm happy.
Follow counts though... If someone follows more people than they could possibly read, it means them following me means nothing. They're probably never going to see anything I say, and it means they don't really care to. Following me isn't about seeing what I say to those people, it's about me thinking they like me for some reason. If you follow so many people that you can't possibly read what they all said on the last 24 hours on, say, 30 minutes, you're either terminally online or you don't actually read what they say. Best case scenario your signal to noise ratio is probably horrible. I like people with low follow counts.
Well boom busts are impossible to avoid, because you can't stop people from lending to each other. But Keynesians think that by creating money during the bust they can smooth it out, which works but it causes even worse problems that accumulate as we can all see.
Fractional reserve lending exacerbates it a lot, because *everyone's* money is being lent out, whereas without it it would just be people that want to lend creating the cycle, you have to have capital earmarked for lending normally but when everyone's money is controlled by a bank that lends it out now you have all liquid capital contributing to the problem.
These debt-austerity boom bust cycles happen no matter what money you use and are impossible to control. They happen because fundamentally, when you borrow something, you're not borrowing from someone else, you're borrowing from your future using them as a facilitator. You're transferring value back in time, which you then won't have in the future when you would've had it. But in the moment you do have it, you have more than you've created. The only way to stop them is to entirely end lending, and even outlawing it wouldn't stop it, there's no way to do so.
That's because you're a small child.
Says not found. I find amber but I can't find this?
Yes, it does become a bandwidth problem, but that problem is much less restrictive than long term storage of ancient irrelevant data. In the bitcoin block size debate, that was the problem for which it was argued that larger blocks lead to centralization. So it's not theoretical, the issue stemming from perpetual storage of all historical data has real world impacts today, bitcoin had to choose between decentralization and transaction throughput, and ironically choosing decentralization has led to choosing LN which has a network topology such that it trends to centralization. Ecash, an old technology that had problems nakamoto consensus solved, is now being necromanced to side step these problems also.
You have to solve the theoretical problems before adoption, or you find yourself looking for band aids and workarounds hastily when the time comes. Also as we have seen with bitcoin and the internet in general, distributed networks ossify with adoption, so its a race against that to solve them as well. You want to get to the natural limit imposed by your technology before you start employing external add ons to improve it, we aren't there with either bitcoin or Monero.
Yeah but if all you need to keep is the UTXO set, then the blockchain doesn't really grow, it fluctuates on size, and approximates a steady state size over time. It only really grows with the size of the userbase. That's how mimblewimble worked on the original paper. With such a scheme transaction size is not really a factor, the overwhelmomg majority of the blockchain storage requirements is historical data.