Last Notes
Good guy @nprofile…pt5w. 🫂
@nprofile…vhl6 totally wants to add threading to reactions, I know it.
Yes. But maybe you are not in the right universe, though.
I wouldn’t be surprised. Amethyst is brilliant.
@nprofile…0md0 says it's coming pre-installed to all Graphene OS users...
But then someone would have to download Amerhyst. 😏
https://mutable.top/muggable/npub1gcxzte5zlkncx26j68ez60fzkvtkm9e0vrwdcvsjakxf9mu9qewqlfnj5z
Pretty cool, but I can see my transactions on Amethyst so mine is better :)
which NIP-29 impelmentation should I use as base for mine? The spec is too ambiguous.. I need to give claude something more specific
The cold wallet cabal worked so well that they scared everyone from developing and using a hot wallets that can be trully used.
Fear turns any rational decision into an emotional one. And that trully sells.
yea i thought of having some sort of tiny hint in op_return, but then the sender would need to use a wallet that does this which brings it closer to what Bitcoin SP does kind of in terms of needing to use a wallet that supports Bitcoin SP flow. Also I don't think I can add stuff in other chains nessarily?
I guess where I'm going with this is:
Discover valid sends > save them in your own nip78 > empty them out > clean up
The sender, assuming a nostr user utilizing a client/signer that supports this, would also have his own nip78 of what he sent (same cleanup of empied balances) as another just-in-case sort of thing where he can rebroadcast or republish if the event got lost.
Is there a risk? yup, but hey draft 1 or something x3
I'll probably add a warning on this NSP page in this signer mention the loss risk.
So, that is what people do when they take a break from Nostr... interesting... :)
You could just giftwrap an unsigned kind 8333, no?
You still need scanning if you don't want to lose funds, since Nostr events have the tendency of disappearing.
We have a Coinjoin @nprofile…ye3s
No. I won't use on-chain zaps at all.
The most useful UX testing is looking over the shoulder of a new user trying to use it. Observe their difficulties. Their expectations and understandings and what they are thinking and trying to do. Where do they get stuck? What are their expectations and what in the app is not making sense to them? Stuff like that.
you should add a monthly subscription choice price to support amethyst now that amethyst has a wallet, and we get some sort of cool badge if we are monthly subscribers
ahhh okay so fundamentally different?
gotcha
Yes, it was a clusterfuck.
Can we have a Burn button.
if you don't want your onchain zaps on Amethyst, you will be able to hit the zap the devs button and donate it to the devs.
didnt that get real spammy tho with how it was implemented/used previously.
or am i making that up?
Indicate somehow I that npub=nostr identity. People may not know the npub nomenclature
https://haven.downisontheup.ca/ae6457cf9dbb3e906c4543356ed0eff86658c72594edf14c373ca38e897775ac.mp4
Check the notifications tab, not the wallet.
@nprofile…vhl6 could the on chain wallet get a transaction history?
That is actually not a bad idea. Your client can just "refund" everyone.
What he said is that this is nothing new. It was hapenning even before we started on chain wallets because any pubkey, of any protocol, can "receive" money (money is locked to the nsec of that key), from any chain. It's by definition impossible to avoid.
I'm spreading it around to those not on the list. Creating more poor's 👀
At least he used Shakespeare though! I laughed when Alex sent him an on chain zaps to encourage him to keep working on it. Beautiful 😍😂
I'm a philanthropist, I'm giving it all away 🎉
Right, so public zaps can be observed and added up to estimate someone's public balance, and this shows us that there are different concepts that we're trying to think about but they are not being clearly distinguished so people end up talking past each other sometimes.
We can distinguish the concepts and think about the design of each concept as a feature.
One concept is social zaps, public records of transactions. This implies a public balance of public transactions (Only an implicit feature for the on-chain zaps. currently basically not implemented for lightning ecash zaps). People are not currently concerned about the public balance of lightning zap transactions. Probably mostly because it's just not currently a feature. And maybe they will be more concerned about public balance in the future, whether its added as a feature or not.
The other concept is private transactions. This is generally what people are trying to build tools for on-chain. Monero has more privatcy built in.
(BTC was the first and simplest implementation of non-custodial VALUE. However that simplest implementation also made the transactions and balances public. But privacy is another important part of money and BTC didn't have a solution for that yet, initially depending on security through obscurity.)
The public-private concepts also interact with the concept of privacy of transactions and balances for the sender and for the receiver. Some senders might want to send anonymously, and some receivers might want to receive anonymously.
A measly 87 cents on that post
https://blossom.ditto.pub/6ea1c72ac3242a9018504ede9593a794b61d2c40648b1c6c8e8ea485ce47d354.png
This was while onboarding a user into Primal which has the best wallet design/setup/onboarding on Nostr. This is why we had to give onchain zaps a try. Nothing is working.
#nevent1q…e0yv
Good luck and I hope them success. I love all projects that tries to scale Bitcoin. But I prefer Spark.
Ok, Spark is bad Ark is great, haha.
they can just check the chain for outputs.
So, @nprofile…ae9u alone beats them all with onchain zaps? :)
