What’s nostr.metadata.com?
If I “follow someone” on nostr, the client should make sure (how?) to always keep connection to at least one common relay.
Choosing your relays is not an easy thing. Not too many to not stress my client and not too few so that I don’t miss out or lose connections.
It would be nice if I could group my subscriptions in the client (Damus). For example nostr:npub1m4ny6hjqzepn4rxknuq94c2gpqzr29ufkkw7ttcxyak7v43n6vvsajc2jl runs her own relay. Why ask other relays for her notes?
Also I really don’t know where my stuff is now. This note will not go to nostr:npub1pu3vqm4vzqpxsnhuc684dp2qaq6z69sf65yte4p39spcucv5lzmqswtfch's 140 chars relay for example.
It’s all a bit fuzzy. An own relay and an own client would solve that, right? Damn, that’s a lot of work.
Interesting. Zap per option would be even more interesting.
Is there something for voting in nostr? I just read this example about a Condorcet methods again:
https://agreeder.com/results-algorithm
It’s so convincingly more fair. Why not vote in priority lists always per default?
Yes, strong accent, little but sturdy man, developing rockets or tanks
My mind always reads “Sovjet Engineer” instead of #soveng
One example of an experience I made, of the positive sort:
I asked my wife to look into our job postings and point out what bothered her. We fixed some formulation details. This has been a year ago. We receive much more applicantions of female software developers now.
One of the negative sort:
A leaving employee made it her last act to introduce unisex toilets at the office. We thought why not and changed labels. Today a lot of new visitors are confused. They insecurely point to the door: can I go to toilet here?
nostr is your trick?
Didn‘t we have something like a „canonical relay“ in NIP-01 in the past? Or was it NIP-02? You said those relay hints were a mistake if I remember correctly. Were they?
I don‘t experience this in the Ruby ecosystem. But probably because not that many people are writting Ruby.
On what are you gonna spend those 42 zap sats? You could also give them to your grand kids.
Hm, I just realized, this question only applied to non-fiat money. For fiat it‘s clear: someone has all the money, she just didn‘t print it yet.
Correct about the king holding 100% but don't worry about it because things will go South long before that.
The difference between the king holding 50% and holding 95% doesn't matter, 10 times the amount of an abstract unit is still an abstract unit. It's like feet vs. meters.
The change in the unit matters though. With the king accumulating gold, or Saylor accumulating Bitcoin or tech companies accumulating dollars, money is withdrawn from circulation and everyone has to recalibrate their yard stick a.k.a. prices. This causes confusion in the system and interrupts the flow of goods and services. You can literally starve with all the grain in the fields.
Just ask dimwits like nostr:npub12262qa4uhw7u8gdwlgmntqtv7aye8vdcmvszkqwgs0zchel6mz7s6cgrkj or nostr:npub1xtscya34g58tk0z605fvr788k263gsu6cy9x0mhnm87echrgufzsevkk5s who are losing customers because of a recent recalibration of the ratio of money supply to services offered. They could have asked those questions beforehand but hey despair can be overwhelming and impact your reasoning.
> starve with all the grain in the fields
I find it weird how it could come to that much specialization. So that now everybody wants to participate in the capitalist arms race where something seems to come from nothing. Everbody investing and hedging until they realize that nothing grew.
But please elaborate about jb55 and Semisol. What‘s there?
Money owned, if it's absolutely never spent, doesn't matter. If it really just sits in a safe somewhere it's as if it doesn't exist in the first place.
The amount of money in circulation matters. However with someone owning a lot there is a risk of them suddenly putting it in circulation and thus suddenly changing the amount of money in circulation. This will cause prices to fluctuate causing price instability. Up or down doesn't matter.
This isn't an abstract problem btw. Fiat currently has problems that are similar. https://www.investors.com/etfs-and-funds/sectors/sp500-companies-stockpile-1-trillion-cash-investors-want-it/
This goes both ways btw, someone being owed a lot of money ("owning" a large negative sum) can suddenly demand loans to be paid back and thus suddenly withdraw a lot of money from circulation with prices again fluctuating. I believe the financial crisis in the USA in the 30's was caused that way.
This is why you need demurrage on money, according to Silvio Gesell's writings. It discourages stockpiling. You'll have to abandon dreams of generational wealth and other outgrowths of capitalism but it'll keep you from starving because of a financial crisis.
This is very nicely put!
My thought were about holding vs circulating as well. The historic example I thought about was Mansa Musa of the Mali empire who caused gold inflation in Egypt on his hajj.
It‘s just that a some point holding or spending doesn‘t make a difference anymore. If there is a king (and only one) and he has all the gold, he cannot use it with his people.
How much of all gold did Mansa Musa own?
Did empiric economical research study what happens if someone owned all the money? How much can you drain liquidity before people will not accept it at all anymore?
Let‘s say, I own 100% of all Bitcoin. This would make Bitcoin worthless. But what if I owned 95% of it? Or 50%? Where‘s the tipping point when buying more Bitcoin devalues it.