LeoWandersleb
Leo Wandersleb

The Samourai devs were the most disgusting and arrogant people I had to interact on social media with. I don't wish there were more people like this.
That said, I hope they don't get jail time for open source contributions.

2025-11-02 17:53:56 UTC

- reply

In fact, packing the bytes into witness data is cheaper, not more expensive for anything above 140B. Sanctioned or not - you can pack those CSAM pics cheaper into the witness part than into OP_RETURN. That's the whole reason (to my understanding) why datacarriersize was deprecated - if we set it to 140B we might as well remove it. IANAL but the whole "sanctioned" argument should be separate from emergency measures. If it really matters that bitcoin as a network is now in any way, shape or form more welcoming to non-financial data then reverting this independent of emergency events should be enough to get back to being officially hostile towards arbitrary data. To try and hunt specific, poorly defined sequences of bytes and only if they are contiguous is probably not based on any real legal theory.

2025-11-02 12:53:36 UTC

- reply

It's pathetic to think that csam in opreturn would be treated differently than in fake pubkeys. If we demonstrate that we can reactively remove csam, we remain subservient to a legal system demanding just that for lesser and lesser offenes.

2025-11-02 10:04:23 UTC

This bip444 can't be taken seriously as long as it keeps the emergency activation in.
If we can re-org out any legally or morally wrong content - stuff that can't be precisely expressed in code - Bitcoin is dead.
Next we will re-org out vaccine hesitancy financing?
https://npub1gm7tuvr9atc6u7q3gevjfeyfyvmrlul4y67k7u7hcxztz67ceexs078rf6.blossom.band/28529704a333dc1c715446c8714cdd01e6d9efa44734deab8b8c325bc5734b8c.png

2025-10-22 07:24:55 UTC

- reply

Politicians that solve problems would get elected. It's more complicated than that.

2025-10-14 14:30:25 UTC

- reply

... which on its own doesn't solve any user's problems.
Open source is a plus over ppq though.

2025-10-14 11:16:05 UTC

- reply

How does it compare to @nprofile…qagl? Ppq can also be paid with ecash via LN.

2025-10-11 02:00:34 UTC

So today, Bitcoin Twitter believes that a v30 release triggered a massive price drop 🤦‍♂️
https://npub1gm7tuvr9atc6u7q3gevjfeyfyvmrlul4y67k7u7hcxztz67ceexs078rf6.blossom.band/d72f9898b9fe9d6ce9eecb7c8b5c6f722d8b50411db0139b786c4bbbb6e53cbb.jpg
v30 is so so bad it took the whole US stock market down.
https://npub1gm7tuvr9atc6u7q3gevjfeyfyvmrlul4y67k7u7hcxztz67ceexs078rf6.blossom.band/1abe70396a1309214a44678b47a707d51c9ac5ec286e4781870de28afa90fc35.jpg
Meanwhile, Core did the right thing and removed v30!
https://npub1gm7tuvr9atc6u7q3gevjfeyfyvmrlul4y67k7u7hcxztz67ceexs078rf6.blossom.band/e32f07845e1cdc4beff0a3ffa99cae2348198d6dce6aa0c900166638204951be.jpg
Stock markets will rally on Monday! Right? ...
/jk. It was Trump doing Trump things all along.

2025-10-05 18:27:14 UTC

- reply

The latter prevents it.
More complicated are for example mobile wallets that force you to use their node as first hop and don't support migrating to a different ln wallet. They can block the public from the node and publish an old unilateral exit without fear of punishment.

2025-09-30 16:52:09 UTC

- reply

Yeah but when the bitcoin only merchant charges 3% more than the fiat competitor, that's usually not what's going on.

2025-09-30 15:21:09 UTC

- reply

Usually, where BTC is also accepted, it doesn't cost more there to use BTC.
Usually, Bitcoin backed credit cards have terribly high fees, so you claim to pay with Bitcoin but the merchant is not a bitcoiner and couldn't care less about bitcoin.
I think, companies that accept Bitcoin directly deserve our support and I'm willing to pay some 2-3% for the pleasure of supporting the Bitcoin circular economy but not 10% unless it has other things going for it.
So I ordered at least 20 times from Fasttech. Sadly they are no more and I wish there was some comparable platform where I could buy all that stuff I'm currently getting from Amazon.

2025-09-30 11:08:28 UTC

- reply

Interesting aspect that miners would exclude big, unpopular transactions as others wouldn't be able to validate those quickly thus resulting in a delay that translates into an orphan risk.
If big OP_RETURNS are evil always and thus have to be filtered out by policy, by your argument, the network would have to ban those by consensus and not just by flimsy policy or else, the network is complicit again. I guess that's a slippery slope.

2025-09-29 10:15:49 UTC

https://npub1gm7tuvr9atc6u7q3gevjfeyfyvmrlul4y67k7u7hcxztz67ceexs078rf6.blossom.band/5a5ac8c48f7fa48824b89e690f36c3f27ea15dd3567b6ff69ee2d4da68b37861.png
Das klingt eher wie "SPD will sich selbst abschaffen" oder "SPD will Deutschland abschaffen" 😬
#nevent1q…05we

2025-09-29 10:07:39 UTC

- reply

You do know that anonymous miners is a feature, too? So as there is no KYC for mining, the blame would be on the protocol either way. Live with it.
OP_RETURN was always just bound by the maximum transaction size. We are not opening up anything now at the consensus level.

2025-09-28 14:45:40 UTC

- reply

They already can mine 100kB blobs if they want to. We are talking policy here, not consensus.

2025-09-28 09:08:35 UTC

- reply

So you're telling me, recklessly increasing the blocksize was a bad idea, executed by an incompetent team?
I don't think, this is in any way comparable with what might happen on BTC.

2025-09-28 08:41:51 UTC

- reply

He's using the word "criminal" where I think he should have used "adversarial".
So what stops an adversary from embedding CSAM in the Bitcoin blockchain? Nothing really. They could do this since day one and since many years with a 100kB OP_RETURN. Coming policy changes did not affect that one bit.
On the other hand, the claim that some CSAM sharing group is using Bitcoin for their stuff is totally ridiculous and transparently just an attack against Bitcoin.
Can you put an occasional CSAM on the blockchain? Sure!
Can you use it for an unstoppable file sharing protocol? No!
And if illegality was the issue: There are many OFAC sanctioned transactions on the blockchain already and nobody, not Core, not Knots intends to block them.

2025-09-27 18:41:15 UTC

- reply

I think, Core's strength isn't diplomacy. They did in the past take the right decisions and for example full RBF was introduced in a much more diplomatic way. Opt-in at first, full later. With OP_RETURN they went full-rbf in one swoop.

2025-09-27 18:38:29 UTC

- reply

I'm not aware of how "Vitalik ... would've built Ethereum on top of Bitcoin" with just OP_RETURN. Ethereum carries much more state that's being checked by the miners than what you could do with just OP_RETURN.
I suspect, monkey jpegs trading is an illusion kept alive for the purpose of hiding this attack as some sort of "for the artists" legitimate project. It never was legitimate.
Which criminal would pay for 100kB of block space at even 1sat/B for something being in the blockchain forever if it wasn't simply to harm Bitcoin? CSAM certainly isn't worth that much.

2025-09-27 13:30:36 UTC

- reply

Datacarriersize is currently, as of Core v29, 83B and it can be set to any other value. Sadly there is no way to just ask nodes about that setting, right? I'd love to see if people use the setting to increase or decrease the value currently. Guess, nodes could track transactions they receive and from where they got them to defer that setting over time but did anybody do that?
To limit the datacarriersize to 40B as Knots, you can just use Core v29 with that setting. Running Knots is really a form of protest and not the expression of a datacarriersize preference. That said, I don't see clear evidence for "a significant portion of the network even changed proactively their node implementation" as the numbers we see at coindance are easily and cheaply faked.

2025-09-27 13:22:19 UTC

- reply

Much to unpack there.
OP_RETURN is deliberately the most stupid of all op-codes. It does nothing but with lots of data. Nodes do not enforce whatever you want to do on top of OP_RETURN, so no, it doesn't turn Bitcoin into Ethereum.
$50+ transaction fees will be required for Bitcoin's success at some point but the monkey picture spammers moved on. They don't have that deep pockets to sustain this attack. They started with pictures on Bitcoin but quickly realized that it has to be some launch date events to actually drive fees in a disruptive way. That made nobody rich and the few stories where it did - are probably just money laundering, so the attackers can't bet on gullible people falling for this indefinitely. They would need other deep pockets for a sustained attack.
Increasing the blocksize is not a fix ever. We need to improve layers on top of the base chain if we want more people to have actual self-custody. With covenants enforced by miners we could scale Bitcoin by x100 without needing 100MB blocks and therefore with improved privacy.

2025-09-27 08:27:56 UTC

- reply

People tend to read that from https://coin.dance/nodes/all
https://npub1gm7tuvr9atc6u7q3gevjfeyfyvmrlul4y67k7u7hcxztz67ceexs078rf6.blossom.band/f5df6d258fcd770524ffca37086d0132c6294e71ce6d2023dcd66f54e585472d.png
I see Core maybe lost 3k nodes since the sudden up-tick of Knots in 2025 but the number is also trivial to fake, especially on TOR. It's really hard to find out if 100 TOR nodes are actually distinct nodes or all the same. I don't know what to make of the much more modest up-tick in Knots numbers since a year prior. Was the conflict already brewing? Did somebody pump the Core numbers in order to opportunely let them drop at the right time? I'm looking at April 2024 to April 2025. Both implementations grew, Core by 3k or 20%. Knots grew 600% in that time! So clearly, something was afoot.

2025-09-27 08:13:19 UTC

- reply

Not sure which point you are trying to make but due to the OOB delivery always being possible and carrier size being a mempool issue, the knots crowd is fighting over mempool and explicitly claim ignorance about what happens in blocks. I think that is misguided. They should pivot to focusing on the public perception of what is invited to be done on the Bitcoin network and not cry over some low-res CSAM briefly being in somebody's node without their knowledge.
By deprecating carrier size settings, Core signaled that protocols can do with OP_RETURN whatever they want. They claim that serious protocols **sadly** wouldn't create 100kB OP_RETURNs because they would miss out on the SegWit discount.
Our worry shouldn't be serious protocols though. Our worry is malicious actors claiming to be serious. They can now spam OP_RETURN with "continuous bites" of nasty pictures that you would "not need specialized software to see". I put that in quotes as there already exists software to extract images from corrupted disk dumps for example. So yes, there would be software that could find these images but I find that a moot point as it's totally not something anybody would do accidentally. Is the mempool serialized to disk in unscrambled form? I guess I could find out but so I could find out how to re-assemble pictures from more obscure protocols so the whole distinction between scrambled in blocks but continuous in mempool is moot.

2025-09-26 18:50:27 UTC

- reply

With this setting:
https://npub1gm7tuvr9atc6u7q3gevjfeyfyvmrlul4y67k7u7hcxztz67ceexs078rf6.blossom.band/b5611e4e6c119a23dcc1dfcc010a093bc03b20e05248dea600cc9800b733a673.png
I see Derek Ross ... 61 but when I click that line, I just get to see one post, not 61. What's the 61?
https://npub1gm7tuvr9atc6u7q3gevjfeyfyvmrlul4y67k7u7hcxztz67ceexs078rf6.blossom.band/3284afddb0432bb477e0f52cde7bac4d2c03911bddb701b719ed00f055078d51.png

2025-09-26 18:18:18 UTC

- reply

What's your evidence for "mass protest"?

2025-09-26 15:42:53 UTC

Here's some history of Bitcoin Policy changes that were controversial at the time:
Basics: Policy is not Consensus. Satoshi's first client did not relay all transactions that were valid according to consensus. This is necessary so an attacker cannot just flood the network with zero fee (consensus valid) transactions to himself at no cost to him but high cost in bandwidth and CPU to all nodes. Still, even the the early policy filters led some to shout "censorship" when trying out things that were consensus-valid.
2013 the Dust Limit was introduced. Transactions sending 1sat to somebody were not relayed anymore. While this was a reaction to "Satoshi Dice" which permanently spammed the UTXO set with "notification transactions", it also forced other projects like "Colored Coins" back to the drawing board.
2014 OP_RETURN Data Carrier Size Limits were introduced. Before, OP_RETURN accidentally allowed spending any funds on chain which was fixed in 2010 by Satoshi, establishing the OP_RETURN as we know it today. It was limited to 40B (8175c79) and then 80B (a930658) via Policy.
2016 Replace-by-Fee (RBF) was introduced. Before that and especially in the early days, users assumed transactions to be final when they showed up in their mempool aka "wallet". "first-seen-safe" was a thing and shaking that up was perceived as an attack on Bitcoin by many. In 2016, RBF wasn't even activated for all transactions. It was an opt-in feature but still, emotions ran high.
2017 the concept of "Priority Transactions" was removed. Up until then, transactions with no fee at all were relayed and actually mined if they were "priority transactions" meaning for example to spend from old enough UTXOs.
2022 Full-RBF was introduced, enabling any unconfirmed transaction to be replaced. This somewhat revived the FUD from 2016.
2025 OP_RETURN is scheduled to be opened up to 100kB which sits at the core of the recent "Knots vs. Core" drama.

2025-09-26 14:22:34 UTC

- reply

Ad hominem vs. ad hominem. Jameson Lopp being of questionable character doesn't refute his claims about Luke being of questionable character.

2025-09-26 14:03:59 UTC

- reply

The knots argument always is regarding the mempool, not blocks, so it would not be relevant if delivered out of band.

2025-09-26 07:17:51 UTC

- reply

It's implied it's trying to trigger anti virus software. Meh ...

2025-09-26 07:08:38 UTC

- reply

https://npub1gm7tuvr9atc6u7q3gevjfeyfyvmrlul4y67k7u7hcxztz67ceexs078rf6.blossom.band/0d14e6e2156a6a58ff587c206c3dfca7bfb3477e5a8853150ec186d60712546a.jpg
They operate itching powder drones in international waters?

2025-09-25 15:15:01 UTC

- reply

Come on ... Charlie Kirk was a kid when that movie was made. Guess the conspirators know time travel.

2025-09-25 08:51:28 UTC

Great question!

2025-09-25 08:46:33 UTC

- reply

TIL: pretyflaco probably speaks German. Sehr schön :)

2025-09-24 18:26:06 UTC

- reply

With our Chilean provider it would show up on their website shortly and I wonder how they could do this otherwise, as people would bombard them with calls. Bet you found out eventually.

2025-09-24 15:47:47 UTC

- reply

Twitter by default shows replies with context to the user. https://npub1gm7tuvr9atc6u7q3gevjfeyfyvmrlul4y67k7u7hcxztz67ceexs078rf6.blossom.band/8736571611925d78b1aad3ef1376d4eb96f3abefb2db7cc8799c1312cb318c90.jpg
Most nostr clients make you choose to either see top posts or opt in to conversations.

2025-09-24 15:27:03 UTC

- reply

Being wrong doesn't make you a spook. Matt is on a mission lately - misguided or not.
Core is accepting the inevitable a little too easily. I think, policy will eventually be irrelevant for what gets into blocks but hasting this always sparked controversy.

2025-09-24 15:01:34 UTC

- reply

Doesn't your provider have a section for that on their site? Did you call them?

2025-09-23 08:33:05 UTC

- reply

Naja, Rüstung ist halt nicht gleich Rüstung. Aber guter Click-bait.

2025-09-23 08:25:42 UTC

- reply

3 business days is by far not the worst case even for westerners but how about more exotic corridors? Russia to Venezuela or North Korea? Nigeria to Nepal?

2025-09-23 08:00:42 UTC

- reply

Quick question - did Jacinda make the cut?

2025-09-22 20:19:53 UTC

- reply

That red line there just got reder.

2025-09-22 15:43:22 UTC

- reply

Yeah, victory ... not. 😢

2025-09-22 14:04:06 UTC

- reply

Being centralized isn't what makes them ill prepared though.
Nostr had to assume Sybil attacks and spam from day one but it's not easier to deal with spam for us. We're just more prepared to fight it.

2025-09-22 09:55:55 UTC

- reply

Now it worked on my client. Your stupid audio is a mess 😗

2025-09-22 07:56:16 UTC

- reply

Can't play this audio past 7s. Is that an issue with noStrudel?

2025-09-22 06:51:25 UTC

- reply

GM
Don't fight the fever. It's your body fighting the intruders. I'd take paracetamol only if the body was over-doing it aka giving you lots of pain.

2025-09-22 06:46:03 UTC

- reply

Aren't ghosts nocturnal animals?

2025-09-21 10:33:51 UTC

- reply

@nprofile…xnfk wasn't there something in that sense? But I think you would basically encrypt the token for the recipient, so others wouldn't be able to recognize it as a valid token.
In the end, zaps probably always need the acknowledgement of the recipient.

2025-09-21 10:18:33 UTC

- reply

Networks matter.
How about: Bots can bootstrap the illusion of valuable networks. People in search of entering valuable networks will fall for these.

2025-09-21 09:01:52 UTC

- reply

No need to say sorry. You did a great job trying to help!
I regret having participated in a different boost campaign that did hide the fact that boosts were paid for and I'm not 100% convinced that paid boosting is a good thing but at least with the transparency @npub1zfs…vd2n intended to provide it wouldn't be deceptive, so maybe we can build that missing tooling to strike a good balance between spam and helping spread the word.

2025-09-21 08:57:59 UTC

- reply

Sorry if my post offended you. My closing statements were that I don't think you were scamming us but just were overwhelmed by the lack of tooling and defenses against Sybil attacks.
Your definition of "at least 100 followers" is trivial to fake so scammers could make sure to zap themselves before anybody sees the post by generating 40 accounts with +100 followers, creating the post and the 40 boosts but publishing them late by one hour. Now others see the post, don't bother to count and boost, too - for free, as the 400ksat budget already went to the sock puppets.
You did not do that but what would be a more robust bounty? I think it has to involve follows, not only followers. Limit the campaign to follows of your follows. If an account can't be reached via one hop from your follows list, it doesn't qualify. You could of course follow your own Sybils but very simple heuristics could expose that if more devs would take the follows graph into account. If all the zapped accounts form an island in the follows graph, the scheme gets exposed. Any site supporting this type of campaign could expose this trivially.
Maybe @npub1vl3…5l7q wants to continue work on his too 🤔 or at least share the code for others to improve upon?

2025-09-21 07:29:18 UTC

- reply

Many years of operations with happy customers like any "regulated" exchange and now the customers lose money because of government? Who's the badies here?

2025-09-20 09:13:07 UTC

- reply

Well ventilated, room for three. Wouldn't have thought that.

2025-09-19 07:28:32 UTC

GM
Epstein didn't kill himself and Donnie didn't drain the swamp.
https://npub1gm7tuvr9atc6u7q3gevjfeyfyvmrlul4y67k7u7hcxztz67ceexs078rf6.blossom.band/651bfd8e88e41dc739a3a2acf7098056fa97dc035482152f94ee35c0f7c57b44.webp

2025-09-19 06:02:27 UTC

- reply

Nah, it will always charge it for your 7am routine but if you go hiking, with no electricity all day - then it will skip charging until after 6am when you're already on your way to the mountain.

2025-09-18 17:50:34 UTC

- reply

> I’m not famous lol, most of my followers are probably bots or inactive accounts.
I think "old" is the word you're searching for. You're old 😉

2025-09-18 17:44:54 UTC

- reply

Or they want to see it but not when the kids are playing on the side. NSFW is just that. It's not "Illegal content" or something. Just not something you'd want to see flicker over your screen at work.

2025-09-18 16:07:27 UTC

- reply

NATO has treaties that Russia is testing right now with 12 odd drones. How much are these treaties worth?

2025-09-18 15:12:47 UTC

- reply

If only it was that clear.

2025-09-18 15:10:56 UTC

- reply

NATO vs. Russia?

2025-09-18 10:08:43 UTC

- reply

In the dev console I saw only 2 errors about google analytics which I think came from youtube. Nothing else.

2025-09-18 10:03:13 UTC

So the other day, @npub1zfs…vd2n promised 10k sat zaps to all that boost his job offer:
#nevent1q…lpqp
Understandably the post got swarmed by legit and not so legit accounts and several of my follows did boost.
@npub1vl3…5l7q even coded a tool to help them find the relevant accounts:
http://bounty-hunter.solajpafistoj.net/
but to this day, only a small selection of users did receive zaps as detected by that tool:
https://npub1gm7tuvr9atc6u7q3gevjfeyfyvmrlul4y67k7u7hcxztz67ceexs078rf6.blossom.band/03bf792e6454bfaa0263bef10a48e1fd613acd338cfc7d46122de38bfa1becad.png
And here are some that did not get zapped:
https://npub1gm7tuvr9atc6u7q3gevjfeyfyvmrlul4y67k7u7hcxztz67ceexs078rf6.blossom.band/ca5cb30c6f6bdc52ecdcf0d05d7f2eb4838d341ee896c12ab0d22cf83ff224d6.png
Of course, nostr is not consistent, so late entrants could always fake the time and claim the bounty. Just be careful to not boost before the OP 🤯.
The tool appears to generate naked hex pub keys, not npubs but I don't see much motivation from @npub1zfs…vd2n to resolve these issues.
Is @npub1zfs…vd2n scamming us? I don't think so but apparently Sybils got zapped while high profile accounts did not get zapped. I guess fulfilling the promise just went over their head, where they had the honest intention to pay up.
We need better tools and a more robust concept of WoT cause Sybil attacks will only get worse.

2025-09-18 08:47:30 UTC

- reply

It's good but crashed the tab quite consistently yesterday. Had to pause using it.

2025-09-18 08:43:28 UTC

- reply

No need to return unsolicited zaps. Just be public about the pressure when they bitch about you not doing their bidding that you never implied to be doing.

2025-09-18 01:57:16 UTC

- reply

There are countries that do not honor IP laws. Iran for example. So it's probably not only IP but also actual trade secrets.

2025-09-18 01:39:30 UTC

- reply

I knew it was possible but it's the first time such an exploit made major news and hardware working against its user stopped being a theoretical thing.
Check your hardware wallets ;)

2025-09-18 01:29:20 UTC

- reply

The third image reads 1934 doesn't it? That's more than 90 years.

2025-09-18 01:12:55 UTC

Are Canada and Mexico scared yet?
#nevent1q…t2hc

2025-09-17 08:49:00 UTC

- reply

Tell us more! Was that a local fan? Do people buy them there at all? How to get my local Rewe to stock up on BitBoxes?

2025-09-16 00:05:35 UTC

https://lightco.in/2025/09/12/covenants/

2025-09-15 16:56:19 UTC

- reply

The control is minimal. They basically closed some subs when mainstream media rallied against them for hosting certain sub cultures.

2025-09-15 16:53:12 UTC

- reply

It's boring on most subs as the most engagement comes from new members that regurgitate old ideas a million times over.

2025-09-15 07:43:13 UTC

- reply

When ⭐ ratings? I want to rate apps and see which apps are getting high ratings from my follows!
And I would integrate that into WalletScrutiny, too.

2025-09-15 07:23:00 UTC

- reply

Wonder what's @nprofile…uh0e' take.

2025-09-15 07:20:53 UTC

- reply

They could still burn tokens as one tries to use their service.
Imagine you receive an ln payment selling ice cream but it doesn't get credited in your wallet cause lightspark thinks the sender was a terrorist.
Imagine you buy 🍨 with such a wallet and your funds are gone but the recipient doesn't get them. Your wallet now accuses you of terror financing without telling you and you somehow have trouble boarding your plane home.

2025-09-15 07:12:24 UTC

- reply

Totally 100%!

2025-09-14 19:05:10 UTC

- reply

It gets cheaper if you only need one node for 20 tor endpoints.

2025-09-14 13:56:41 UTC

- reply

The "IRS".

2025-09-14 07:46:30 UTC

- reply

Go to any protest big enough to not get ignored by the news. This happens almost always.

2025-09-13 17:23:21 UTC

- reply

What? Never drink and text I guess ...

2025-09-13 12:18:20 UTC

- reply

I wonder what's the harm in taking back the deprecation of a policy control and adding a way to restore the v29 OP_RETURN handling. Change the default but leave that pressure valve open.

2025-09-13 08:37:49 UTC

- reply

The change in v30 is a very symbolic capitulation to shitcoins and spam. Now, VCs will be more likely to invest in these non-monetary protocols as Bitcoin has given up all resistance. Before, building on Bitcoin was shaky grounds for on chain rock pictures. Now it's open season. The investment proposition just got more solid.

2025-09-12 20:29:11 UTC

- reply

Yes but the timeouts are not weeks.

2025-09-12 19:47:05 UTC

- reply

That looks like Credit Card pre-authorizations that put funds on hold but in the LN context that would put funds on hold along the whole chain, thus reducing the liquidity of routing nodes.

2025-09-12 16:08:59 UTC

- reply

It's more complex but in terms of real world use I only see Cashu so far.

2025-09-12 16:08:24 UTC

- reply

So the priority is Bitcoin backed Chaumian cash?

2025-09-12 16:01:26 UTC

- reply

"the number one priority is cashu" ... and not Fedimint?

2025-09-12 14:04:22 UTC

- reply

You say, core devs are "either corrupt, compromised or stupid". Option 1 and 2 are equal, aren't they? I'm pretty sure they are not plain stupid. With just the high level view you are taking, how about ignorant or detached regarding social dynamics?
I don't mind increasing the default to 100k or allowing multiple op_returns but datacarriersize working in clearly unintuitive ways with no way (?) to enforce the old default op_return limit feels off.

2025-09-12 10:26:56 UTC

- reply

OMG! Whenever I discover a new tool I like, I try to give the first-use feedback cause I can't give it later. I consider this as free quality testing I provide. I also do that on GitHub but haven't found (or searched) the jumble repo yet. Just dumping fresh from my experience.

2025-09-12 10:23:17 UTC

- reply

The security reason is a great one and I hope bitcoin can be part of the solution here. Imagine shops swapping BTC for cash: They tend to accumulate cash which makes them a juicy target for robberies but if they could work like ATMs handing out the cash, too, not only to card using clients like some supermarkets do, they could lower their risk. If only regulators wouldn't get in the way ...

2025-09-12 10:18:05 UTC

- reply

Fiat is a shitcoin for saving but for spending, cash is still king as far as I'm concerned. Never hold more than a month worth of fiat and you're fine.

2025-09-12 10:16:15 UTC

- reply

If you don't have a life with family and an urge to get things done, sure, you can do that. And I appreciate some do but it's not for everyone.

2025-09-12 10:13:18 UTC

- reply

Want some more? I like on noStrudel to see both the preview and the edit view at once. Switching is fumbly. And if you implement it, do it better than @npub1ye5…knpr and add a mechanism where my cursor jumps into the edit section when I click on the preview section as that happens a lot ;)

2025-09-12 08:18:07 UTC

- reply

Sometimes I think if the war on cash heats up, more people would pivot to Bitcoin but your post is scary! That would be clear evidence that we are doomed indeed. It's just the central banks sitting on their hands with their CBDC rollouts.

2025-09-12 08:15:53 UTC

- reply

Legal drug dealers? I'm so confused.

2025-09-12 08:14:30 UTC

- reply

Is cash "their money"? While I wish we would go straight to Bitcoin, I think plastic is strictly worse than cash. A cash society is reasonably anonymous, arguably more so than on-chain Bitcoin.

2025-09-12 08:10:24 UTC

- reply

Same here but the card-only surprises keep coming.

2025-09-12 07:48:49 UTC

Every swipe of your card strengthens the path to CBDCs and weakens Bitcoin.
Don’t swipe against what you believe in.
Don’t be anti-Bitcoin.

2025-09-12 07:06:09 UTC

https://i.nostr.build/A59KeGaENNrYPXv5.png
Trying out Jumble coming from noStrudel and I'm pleasantly surprised. This filter for example. I guess I'm missing out on some of the content with other clients? But please make the filter update the feed instantly, without having to hit "apply". It's rendering fast enough and that way it's easier to check out "only this type". Also it would be cool if the relevant events would get highlighted onHover.