What you find valuable is your decision. What you contribute that others find valuable is a mutual decision. No one can set a price on it. You can zap a single sat, and it will still be appreciated.

It’s still early enough for anyone to stack a life-changing amount. Just don’t get discouraged by what you think others have.

There are people on the little bird site flexing their OG buys today, and it’s disgusting.

Other than bitcoin, bitcoiners talk

- Energy

- Farming

- Health

- Family

- Politics

What the hell do shitcoiners talk about?

It’s odd that so many people still feel uncomfortable receiving value for their content directly from others.

When you interact on centralized social media, you’re freely giving your thoughts, opinions, and personal preferences to corporations and advertisers who extract as much value from it as possible and give you nothing in return.

When you’re here, you’re exchanging value for value, peer-to-peer. Why does that scare anyone?

Mostly stupid.

We should be paying for services rather than forcing companies to rely on ads. Especially when ad buyers that all too often become a tool of political control. $8/month is a perfectly reasonable price for Twitter.

The only issue is that you can't pay anonymously, with a crypto currency. Even dogecoin would be better than nothing.

#[0]

👀 “In addition, any user can act as a server using their own phone's primary phone number and a Wi-Fi/data connection at the press of a button, allowing for peer-to-peer distributed networks.” nostr:note1l37pjwljx6fqwc6ezsyerxu6k4f5me9729fvlj73uwkhxppvll6qy95ph5

Imagine if Nostr was around during the 2020 election and Covid hysteria...

"Because money is a belief system, the manipulation of money is a form of passive-aggressive psychological abuse. People who distort the medium for transferring financial information are systemic predators who prey on people's belief system, eroding their ability to cooperate with each other and contributing to the collapse of society. The most successful moneys have been those which PHYSICALLY CONSTRAIN this type of systemic exploitation."

—Jason Lowery, Softwar p127

I feel like since NIP-05 identifiers verify a user's association with an organization (via domain name control), not their identity, Nostr clients should support a user having multiple NIP-05 identifiers, so that a user can show all of the organizations that they are associated with.

Also, instead of displaying a check mark, the organization should be able to define a graphic/badge/etc that gets displayed for their organization when a user has a valid NIP-05 address for their domain configured. This would more accurately represent the association with the organization rather than the check mark which has historically meant something different (identity verification).

#[0]? #[1]?

A hash of the contents of the file was saved on a nostr relay, signed by the author. If that hash changes, the verified symbol turns red.