Good discussion about NIP-29. My opinion of it change from "wtf is this?" based on misunderstood assumptions, to "ok it's not that worrying". Would I use it as it currently is? Depending on what I want to make, and with the mentality of aiming at a target audience that want to 'self-host', then maybe. Would I use an altered version of it (if you read in the discussion what that is)? More towards yes in a general sense but hard to say still for me. For the Discord alt I'd build... there are pros in and cons for different approaches, in regards to reach that Discord quality of everything but with decentralization and censorship resistant / nostr in mind, NIP-29 or otherwise. I'll take a few days digesting everything to everything before seeing what I'd do. Leaning towards something custom but a mish-mash of things existing things... we'll see.View quoted note →

I figured out how to word my dislike of most turn-based games: Aside from being generally boring to play, there is barely any or no skill involved to the gameplay (keep in mind i said "most turn-based games"). Persona, for example, you can't do decent damage? You're dead. Elden Ring, even if you're naked with one HP and the beginner sword, you can finish the game if you're skilled and patient enough. An example of turn-based games where good skill is involved (unless you're a robot?) where it's not just bigger number = better, that'd be Chess. Another example, though i haven't played it yet, that leans away from no-skill-turn-based, seems like it'd be Expedition 33. #gaming

Seems like there's discourse with NIP-29 again? Yea it's still bad, at least in the sense of building a product for the general public. I think I don't like it because it makes me thing of ActivityPub/Mastodon (it's not it, but it's decently leaning towards it). The Discord alt I'll be building won't follow this NIP at all.View quoted note →

Had a quick discussion with a friend that recently got into #nostr and provided me with their experience, where he didn't mind the technical hiccups, the shit UX here and there, what he really minded was not finding people to follow that were sharing things he can relate to, where a lot of what he found were people mostly talking about nostr and bitcoin. Basically the same feedback all nostr devs get most of the time. However, the solution most devs get wrong is not, imo, the correct one, where they've made lists of various topics to follow specific people, different types of algos, etc. The solution I told him (and the public whoever is reading this now) are a few things: - Wait and see when companies you're interested in to say "follow us on nostr", where you'd then follow them, see their post, interact with them and interact with others that reply in their posts, and check with those people that are replying to see if they post stuff that interest you and follow them if it passes your interest threshold. - Use nostr products that are of specific industries or topics, where you'd specifically see posts about those industries or topics. - Lastly, use hashtags of things you might be interested in, in terms of search and posting as well (someone might follow you as a result of searching for that hashtag and you'd follow them back if it passes your interest threshold), where you'd search for posts with those hashtags and see who to follow based on their posts. That's how I've been using social media all my life to fill up my follow list enough that it keeps me entertained/satisfied with my feed experience, I did not rely on lists or algorythms at all (as i didn't see a need, not that i was against it, so it was useless to me). Regarding that second point, to expand on it with examples: Primal, Damus, Amythest, Jumble, or even DNN or DENOS that I made, etc, are products that don't bring in culture, they are just general tools or systems. DEG Mods and soon DEGA (game mods and games, games industry) and other things i'd build, as well as others (one that I know is about drinking wine / communities around that. Another is about anime/manga, etc), are cultural products that bring in specific types of people that share the same interests together. Because of the nature of nostr, cultural nostr products will be the driving force of filling the void of 'people to follow', along with the other two points i mentioned, that tool/system nostr products are missing. Building tool/system type products are very important for nostr, but building cultural type products are very important for nostr as well. If you're a dev, build what you want, but keep in mind the difference.

I decoupled the names event from the connection records (like dns records for when you update your domain) in DNN so you don't have to update two places at the same time (not sure why I decided that in the past...). DNN node peer discovery is working (two nodes on two different hosts), but there's a design flaw with it that I'm fixing. After that, I need to make sure that the DNN daemon is working after that decoupling change, along with the forked Min browser, double-check on delegation if it still works along with ssl/tls self signatures, clean up docs, then I'd release the DNN node code (so that people can see the horror, but it's working! x3). I want to also see if I can package it for umbrel/start9/cloudron, but I'll pause that for temporarily. Then I can start poking nostr clients on their thoughts about it, and see if they'd implement it into their clients, then start talking with browser projects/devs for the same purpose, then linux distros, etc. During which, I'd start working on that Discord alt.

Hopefully I'll remember to add DMs to the forked version of Jumble the way I see it UX wise + with the more private nip17 version of it / zero metadata leaked (that also stops potential spam from being received and processed, but at the cost of not allowing people to cold DM u) I figured out for a client.

Funnily enough, this made me realize how amazing DNN is, not DNN itself but the idea behind it: Cleanly, harmlessly, and effeciently anchoring nostr identity to Bitcoin that results in unlimited application/usecase possibilities. At first I was amazed "holy shit is the ICANN-DNS problem solved?", and in the past two days I've realized "holy mega-shit this extends beyond solving ICANN-DNS". DNN is just the first application/usecase/solution in this system. This also means, to a degree, there's no need for a lot of alt blockchains to exist, so this isn't a threat to Bitcoin, this is actually a potential threat to a large number of alt blockchains... But I'll only be focusing on DNN for now and make that the best that it can be and try my best to have high adoption with it so that people don't need to worry about ICANN-DNS (and SSL/TLS) anymore. Others could figure out other services with this now discovered system, which... let's call it 'Cross-Protocol Anchoring'. A process that connects a key from an identity protocol (e.g., a npub in Nostr) to a key in an anchor protocol (e.g., a Bitcoin address) to produce a verifiable connection record within the anchor protocol. This connection record can then be used as a deterministic reference point to tie application-specific data under the identity protocol, without modifying the anchor protocol itself or adding any new data to it. This probably needs a document or whitepaper or something to be written for it. Hopefully I'll remember and find the time to do that x3View quoted note →

btw, i haven't mentioned this before, but DNN isn't reliant on DNN nodes to work (and that's pretty cool!), but it does rely on it to lessen the load on users/nostr-clients/browsers/OSs, as well as provide a similar quality of service and reliability of traditional DNS and services like Mullvad/Cloudflare for content moderation and saftey. Having a DNN node network/system also provides many other benefits, aside from reliability, so that's another reason for its existance and value for people to run one up. If you're wondering how it isn't reliant on a node to work: naboutgateb > translates to block 6744 at position 2 > queries bitcoin nodes to find the specific transactions ID after applying rules > queries multiple nostr relays to find an event published with this TXID > finds it then the npub that published it to derive a bitcoin address from it > if the derived address matches the input/out of the bitcoin transaction then it's verified that this npub is the owner > print: ☑ for ID verification /or/ start fetching domain records /or/ start fetching metadata This all would be done client-side/browser-side/OS-side without a DNN node, unreliabily, but with a node it handles all of the middle part and highly reliable.

Had an interesting discussion with another person about bloat/spam on bitcoin, we were pretty much on the same page, aside from my DNS solution with DNN. Even though DNN doesn't add anything to Bitcoin (no op_return data, no exploitation of witness data / taproot, zero), no writes, where it only reads from Bitcoin as users do a simple self-transfer (bitcoin address A sends to the send bitcoin address A), I could not comprehend the presented issue of: 'There's now an incentive for people to do self transfers, and at scale this would result in bloat in bitcoin not for its intended purpose of sending money from A to B.' (paraphrasing) I couldn't comprehend the presented or perceived issue because: 1. It is sending A to B ('B' being 'A' itself) 2. It doesn't add anything, no bloat 3. Even if a full block or blocks were about these self-transfers, they are legit and clean (no non-transactional data / zero) The gentleman I was discussing it with see DNN as a bigger threat than Ordinals, which came to me as a surprise considering I myself am against it, and don't mind also if op_return was zero, and that's why I made the DNN the way it is now. My best attempt at coming to an understanding is that because the reason/incentive isn't about sending money from A to B just so that B can have the money, then this shouldn't be socially pushed to become mainstream because if it catches on and many people start doing self-transfers, it'll bloat bitcoin blocks with these self-transfer type of transactions. But even then, my thought was "So... because the reason/incentive for sending a transaction isn't for sending someone money or utxo consolidation, then it's a bad utxo, even though it's no different from any other clean utxo, if not cleaner in comparison to many other utxo because no op_return rule + input=output, as in as legit/greenlight of a bitcoin transaction as it can be". I was wished upon that I'd stop doing DNN because of this perceived threat that's supposedly bigger than ordinals and op_return (combined?), but wtihout coming to understanding how this is that big of a threat, if a threat at all, I probably won't... ...not out of being malicious, as I'm simply solving the ID and DNS problem with it, as effeciently as possible, and as cost-effective and cleanly cleanly as possible, and the most simplest with the highest security possible, and there's no one backing me, and I won't be getting anything out of this aside from using it like everyone else, so there's no conflict of interest or ulterior motive (not saying anyone is saying that, just trying to deliver a point, which is...), so since I can't see or understand the problem, then I can't even agree or disagree if it is a problem or not to then decide if i'd continue making DNN or not, as a result i'd continue making it. From my point of view after thinking about it, the pushback isn't a protocol purity resistance (resistance against op_return/junk, witness exploitation, etc, which is a legit pushback and I resist it as well), but rather a hyper purestic ideological that extends/overeaches outside of bitcoin. Going back to what Satoshi mentioned about this topic, where one or more people asked about adding a DNS solution into Bitcoin, the idea was rejected and suggested that a DNS solution should be on a different chain, so that no non-bitcoin/transactional data is added to Bitcoin, and as a result namecoin and others like it were born, however, the discovery with DNN is that it follows that exact logical reasoning: nothing is added to Bitcoin (no spam/junk/bloat), and DNN only observse it (observes only clean transactions). If there was such a thing like a 'Satoshi Test', then DNN passes it with flying colors. When I think about my opinions on Bitcoin in regards to what should be done with it or what shouldn't be done with it, the line is clear: don't add unrelated things to it (op_return, witness exploit, ordinals, etc), don't overreach (prevent people from doing a normal utxo because of a disagreement on the why, which is more dangerous as that would add subjectivity to objective system). However, I might have gotten something wrong or am fully delusional, so if you have thoughts, feel free to share it.

The people you like and/or respect and/or admire might make wrong decisions, have bad opinons or stances, or even do something bad, and it doesn't mean that you have to agree with them, follow what they have done, or defend them, and it's not wrong to point it out, and it also doesn't mean that you have to cut them off or stop liking/respecting/admiring them. Focus on the topic, do what you think is right with it, unaffected by the people around the topic, be it friends/family/etc and how it may affect them, and carry on. Reitirating, be it friend or foe, god or the devil, take what's useful to from all to help you reach what you'd think is right and cast away all other elements unrelated to the topic (the idea, the problem, the solution, etc).