Azz

This is great. From what I understand cordon doesn't need your notes to be searchable on public relays, so the meta data is more private. It just looks like you are communicating with an agent.
#nevent1q…fmr8

2026-10-06 22:16:44 UTC

- reply

Ooof, I read about that. Sorry to hear.

2026-10-04 02:09:34 UTC

- reply

A coordinator let's the metadata hide like your communicating with an agent right?

2026-10-01 12:03:13 UTC

#meme #memes https://cdn.nostrcheck.me/707f74e72b142a1d94981cd2147ebdc931de68f1ac1e1bad30913bf9803fe216.jpeg

2026-10-01 11:16:19 UTC

- reply

At some point moneros tail emissions will equal the average rate of key loss and effectively be a fixed supply

2026-09-27 02:09:56 UTC

Why did the chicken cross the road #cassowary #MissionBeach https://cdn.azzamo.media/41d7f30513b933daaa590f75cf68d668eedee219f3e5c88b6a4797730ab52238.jpg https://cdn.azzamo.media/ccfa12bb88cb3ea8b0a45db7eae5eef589594e84e57864ad2f22a6521d783572.jpg

2026-09-25 23:03:57 UTC

- reply

No, I'm saying that the banks will trade against the plebs

2026-09-25 10:05:43 UTC

- reply

But only as a currency right? You can't list it for sale

2026-09-25 07:55:06 UTC

Caldwell Australia #AUStrich
https://cdn.azzamo.media/905ee93d1654b0f027178b9cf7b7fc250d4282bf94026bac96421e74fa626bab.jpg
https://cdn.azzamo.media/bf775998e824b2ffa6858beb0753ba8018754a58724e569cd34f02feabd6581e.jpg

2026-09-24 12:17:26 UTC

- reply

Looks like I could boost it too

2026-09-24 04:22:59 UTC

- reply

Need to get apps like robosats and mostro to have xmr as an option.

2026-09-23 01:02:54 UTC

- reply

Yeah, she started doing it when she was 3 😂

2026-09-23 00:59:18 UTC

- reply

My daughter has an alter ego that she blames when she is being cheeky.

2026-09-22 23:56:55 UTC

- reply

That's the point of the green green green red meme. To fool everyone we still had room to go when we were in fact at the top.
Need to go through and mark everyone who posted it as a bad actor if they have over 1000 followers or a useful fool if they have less, then block all of them.
Need to be ruthless to weed out the grifters.

2026-09-22 21:56:30 UTC

- reply

I love Sicily. I have noticed the same things in the 12 years I have been visiting.

2026-09-22 10:18:05 UTC

- reply

Is that for push notifications?

2026-09-20 22:14:16 UTC

- reply

How do I get this working?

2026-09-20 04:49:46 UTC

Then he came right in next to us
https://cdn.azzamo.media/727c7adaaec0355c9e189c5462fc66b3d073ad620d630dc9fb434b668ae55945.jpg
#nevent1q…63dx

2026-09-20 03:37:11 UTC

Backyard kookaburra
https://cdn.azzamo.media/f11f1edc6dcebf64a96a70d3aff1be2ad569b1fdd137d3dadba0ae5771a6b07b.jpg

2026-09-18 23:56:49 UTC

- reply

No, I just think its important to remain cognizant of the threats so that clients build default protections. Like Amethyst using Tor when connecting to random relays. Most clients don't.

2026-09-18 23:45:08 UTC

- reply

Ok, you can avoid it, but half of nostr has the primal relay and probably isn't using Tor. Its not fair to say that nostr doesn't, but with nostr you can avoid it

2026-09-18 22:44:06 UTC

- reply

You don't think Primal are doing that?

2026-09-18 22:03:04 UTC

- reply

Your IP address probably

2026-09-18 20:34:49 UTC

- reply

What's his alt?

2026-09-18 20:28:42 UTC

- reply

The data is public, there will be companies scraping all the data.

2026-09-17 11:20:18 UTC

- reply

Thanks for commenting. I’m not suggesting we should pay for everything, and I strongly support freely sharing knowledge. But where someone invests considerable skill and effort in producing something valuable, I think there’s a legitimate case for setting a price rather than relying entirely on voluntary donations.
If we want independent thinkers and truth tellers to thrive, they need to be able to earn a living without depending on advertising, grants or patrons with their own agendas. Otherwise, we risk taking their work for granted while leaving them dependent on those willing to fund it.
As for mental transaction costs, I think NWC can substantially reduce that friction.

2026-09-17 09:51:59 UTC

- reply

Still a bitcoiner too, I've come to realise that bitcoin maximalism was an attempt to capture it and derail its ability to do away with trusted third parties and function as P2P money.
I wrote this before the coldcard fiasco, but now its pretty evident that there were bad actors promoting an ingroup circle jerk of substandard solutions and ideas mascurading as the only pure way.

2026-09-16 02:48:06 UTC

- reply

Watching Monero feels like watcging bitcoin in 2013.

2026-09-16 02:30:46 UTC

- reply

I think you already know this, but funding is to ensure that nothing dangerous to the funder takes off.
They pay to steal oxygen.

2026-09-14 21:31:05 UTC

- reply

Same

2026-09-14 11:05:35 UTC

This is pretty good
#nevent1q…h0ya

2026-09-13 10:31:52 UTC

- reply

Some of us came here as bitcoin maximalists and were slowly persuaded by the arguments.

2026-09-13 05:26:52 UTC

Ahh muffler burn. Haven't felt that in 30years. This ones on my finger.

2026-09-13 02:24:40 UTC

- reply

Lol at "classic"

2026-09-12 22:22:37 UTC

- reply

That's the op. Block and ignore anyone infected with that mind virus

2026-09-12 09:20:30 UTC

- reply

Nice time. I'm struggling to get under 28 at the moment

2026-09-12 02:50:42 UTC

Came across this metal cutout in someone's front lawn today. 😂 #dogstr https://cdn.nostrcheck.me/edf458c199483c59ef865e421fbd74818e3638695a002f138088c604e12023ee.jpeg

2026-09-10 21:31:22 UTC

- reply

Easy to dismiss as not spam. Need to be able to give zero knowledge proof of web of trust threshold or something

2026-09-10 20:25:14 UTC

- reply

https://cdn.nostrcheck.me/d04abdb282ee3b4850ea5e3984ccae39b814fafec133cbf5a52802423dbaa2c2.jpeg

2026-09-08 11:03:16 UTC

- reply

15% is a small fee to help people spot fake bitcoin.

2026-09-07 22:44:08 UTC

- reply

I imagine the nerves hitting send on a 3400 BTC on chain TX.

2026-09-07 10:22:02 UTC

- reply

Exposing Liquid as a poor alternative to on chain bitcoin is the ultimate white hat move.

2026-09-07 10:04:48 UTC

- reply

That's why Amir Taaki says crypto is squad wealth.
When the squad allocates its productive means to another honest chain, it wins value from the controlled chain and becomes self perpetuating, forcing bad actors to throw good money after bad, whittling away their wealth, that they can no longer maintain by capturing labour.
Not sure why the Blake fork has a transparent ledger, that allows identification and pressure on dissidents. If you are convinced of state level bad actors, you need privacy.

2026-09-06 20:45:20 UTC

2026-09-04 11:38:12 UTC

- reply

She's probably not playing the gunners either

2026-09-02 09:30:48 UTC

- reply

Auto correct https://www.canva.com/ai-assistant/

2026-09-02 08:50:42 UTC

- reply

As in Canvas AI?

2026-09-01 08:26:43 UTC

#AUSTrich
#nevent1q…nx3m

2026-08-30 08:59:48 UTC

- reply

I'm saying you have been psyoped.
Those incentives stall out and don't have anything of substance sustaining them except a banking cartel that captured bitcoin and drove its price up to kill off competition to their monopoly.
In 2 more 10x runs the market cap is greater than the total global wealth. At that point any increase is verifyably overpriced.
If we suddenly adopt the lightning network and use it as MoE, we will be reliant on custodial banks as the limited block size will prevent sovereign utxo ownership. We will use bitcoin, but pay fees to bankers not miners.
What drives adoption? Wjen the enshittification of Bitcoin becomes apparent and it becomes a tool to entrench the establishment, what maintains its price? At that point any economic activity outside of bitcoin detracts from its value. The value proposition of any competing and functioning currency has a lot more potential and the house of cards fails.
Only totalitarian regulation can save it and force servitude on everyone.
This dystopian future can be avoided if Bitcoin develops steadily acros multiple projects backed by genuine economic value.

2026-08-30 08:20:10 UTC

- reply

I have thought about the game theory. The strategy you describe is to make Bitcoin the world’s only medium of exchange by persuading everyone to hoard it until competing currencies disappear. That allows those who accumulated Bitcoin first to gain from the labour of everyone who must acquire it later. That is not replacing the banking establishment. It is becoming the banking establishment.
If the aim is freedom, Bitcoin should allow individuals to retain the fruits of their labour without others extracting from them. That requires genuine monetary competition. The credible risk that people may direct their labour and savings into another currency disciplines every monetary system and its largest holders.
Refusing to use Bitcoin leaves its price dependent on speculative demand rather than anchored in a circular economy. That makes it fragile. Banks and large traders are structurally advantaged in fragile speculative markets through their size, superior knowledge of liquidity flows and ability to trade in both directions. Users are told only to buy and hold, making their behaviour predictable. Information and size asymmetry reward the banking establishment and burn users.
That is greater fool theory, not squad wealth. Squad wealth comes from people freely allocating the fruits of their labour among competing currencies and collectively shifting economic power away from institutions that exploit them. It requires continuing competition and the freedom to exit.
A Bitcoin monopoly would not free users from the establishment. It would merely create a new one.

2026-08-30 06:15:25 UTC

Bitcoin maximalist falsehood #3: “Bitcoin is trustless.”
Bitcoin does not eliminate trust. It reduces and redistributes it. Users still depend on software, hardware, developers, miners and the social consensus that determines which rules constitute Bitcoin.
That social consensus is Bitcoin’s greatest attack surface. Code cannot decide its own purpose or determine which future version deserves the name Bitcoin. People do.
This is Bitcoin’s politics. Core developers, miners and influencers exert significant influence over what Bitcoin is and what it may become. Defending Bitcoin against capture requires a broad network of well informed users who can examine proposals, choose their own software and reject changes they do not support.
“Don’t trust, verify” is empty if users do not understand what they are verifying or have no practical choice when they disagree.

2026-08-30 05:35:55 UTC

Bitcoin maximalist falsehood #2: “Never sell your Bitcoin.”
Bitcoin is money. Holding $100 worth of Bitcoin may support scarcity, but it does little to establish Bitcoin as a medium of exchange or unit of account.
If that same $100 changes hands ten times within a circular economy, it settles $1,000 of trade. Each time, someone’s labour, time, goods or energy is valued in Bitcoin rather than fiat.
There is a difference between abandoning Bitcoin for fiat and circulating Bitcoin as money. A real Bitcoin economy requires people to earn it, spend it, accept it and price goods in it.
You cannot build a monetary system by treating the money as too sacred to use.

2026-08-30 05:23:04 UTC

Bitcoin maximalist falsehood #1: “Bitcoin only.”
A fixed supply does not guarantee economic freedom. Debt slavery and usury existed under some of history’s soundest monetary systems.
Those without money must work on terms acceptable to those who already hold enough to pay them. Once ownership becomes sufficiently concentrated, holders can impose increasingly unjust and usurious terms while still claiming the money itself is “sound.” You are not free merely because the currency used to pay you cannot be inflated.
Real freedom includes the right to allocate the fruits of your labour to another currency. The credible threat that people may direct their time, production and savings into money not already hoarded by existing holders limits that power.
Bitcoin should earn users through free choice. Declaring every alternative heresy protects incumbents, not users.

2026-08-28 07:14:10 UTC

Under rated
#nevent1q…z5zr

2026-08-25 09:39:14 UTC

- reply

Lol, they are a cancer. Especially saylor

2026-08-24 09:15:47 UTC

- reply

That comparative table is straight up lies. Pretty easy to verify.

2026-08-23 07:04:59 UTC

- reply

Yeah, the Gaza beggar is a bot

2026-08-23 03:10:01 UTC

- reply

I think the local AI model is the way to go.

2026-08-23 02:18:58 UTC

https://npub1wvtljy7rmeeeaqat9hwxwq9g7h90ghavtgpvd2yxk400ndlrf4qsytjhd0.blossom.band/02330e6e2079e6bfc8980d463dbff1e73f8540bfc23081574ee2806322e4d938.jpg #meme

2026-08-21 23:47:51 UTC

- reply

The difference is bugger all though.

2026-08-21 00:23:36 UTC

- reply

https://youtu.be/ELea5zLsMWI?si=b-LJAPmNzxeY8x2G

2026-08-18 03:22:01 UTC

- reply

Probably just need an air gapped laptop and an encrypted USB with the keys on it, and a paper backup.
The psyop against using bitcoin includes over complicating it and making users feel unsafe.

2026-08-13 12:04:10 UTC

- reply

Fixed it https://npub1wvtljy7rmeeeaqat9hwxwq9g7h90ghavtgpvd2yxk400ndlrf4qsytjhd0.blossom.band/4d4f5d04ddab9458a57cb2872cdfde83d9dc298f82ad6bdb4fc8c154fd343a6f.jpg

2026-08-12 12:32:52 UTC

- reply

Mises did not argue that sound money requires an absolutely fixed supply. Gold and silver both increased through mining, and he was not opposed to people choosing between competing monies.
The key point is that new money should come through real work and market competition, not political discretion or debt creation.
That is why I favour a small tail emission. The protocol makes new coins available, but miners still have to compete and expend real resources to earn them. The market decides whether that effort is worthwhile.
Free choice of money matters more than treating absolute scarcity as a virtue.

2026-08-12 01:43:11 UTC

- reply

What's the correct rate of inflation?
As close to zero as possible.
But absolute scarcity does not mean zero inflation. If the economy grows while the money supply stays fixed, you get deflation. If the economy contracts because of drought, war or famine, prices can still rise even though the money supply has not changed.
Money sits in an equilibrium between the amount of goods and services being produced, the amount of money available, and the demand to hold that money.
If a banker controls a large share of a scarce money supply and sits on it, money becomes harder to get. Prices fall, wages fall, and everyone else has to work harder for less. The banker can then start buying assets, putting that money back into circulation and pushing things the other way.
That is the real issue.
Once someone gets enough control over the money supply, they can influence its availability for their own benefit. It does not really matter whether that control comes from owning most of a scarce asset or from controlling government monetary policy.
Absolute scarcity is not the same thing as honest money.
The goal should be money that holds its value as closely as possible over time.

2026-08-11 22:27:58 UTC

- reply

Why do we need absolute scarcity?
So those who accumulated early can hoard it and harvest an ever greater share of everyone else’s wealth while everyone else fights over the scraps?
That is exactly the problem we were supposed to be escaping.
Bankers accumulate assets, influence the rules and benefit from a monetary system tied to government monopoly. Money becomes a mechanism through which existing power compounds itself.
I want sound money, not a permanent rent on everyone who comes later.
People should be able to own the fruits of their labour. Money should preserve the value of that work, not guarantee that whoever accumulated the scarce asset first can extract an ever increasing claim on everyone else's future production.
Scarcity matters. Absolute scarcity is not the same thing as honest money.
If you don't work, you shouldn't eat.

2026-08-11 11:26:28 UTC

This is a good read.
Bitcoin was always going to become a power struggle at the nation state level. Anything capable of challenging the monetary system was eventually going to attract attempts to control it. At least for now, Bitcoin creates money through work rather than debt.
But what is the end goal?
Simply killing Bitcoin would not remove the threat. The idea would remain, and destroying the dominant cryptocurrency could just clear the field for something harder to control. Maintaining Bitcoin’s dominance while limiting what it can actually be used for makes far more sense.
That means restricting peer to peer use through regulation, while preserving enough transparency to make those restrictions enforceable.
Transparency does not stop P2P. Regulation does. Transparency makes the regulation enforceable.
The declining block subsidy creates another vulnerability. As it falls, the cost of supporting or influencing hash power becomes smaller relative to the financial system around Bitcoin. If maintaining influence over mining has strategic value, it does not necessarily have to be funded by mining revenue alone. Banking revenue can subsidise it to maintain control.
This is why I think Knots was too inconsequential. If it was going to seriously challenge Bitcoin’s direction, it should have thrown down the gauntlet.
Privacy at the base layer, making peer to peer cash much harder to regulate through surveillance. Then a small tail emission, maintaining a permanent market for proof of work and making it harder for mining to become dependent on external financial interests as the block subsidy disappears.
But the more fundamental defence against capture is competition outside Bitcoin.
Maximalism is what enables capture. When one network becomes the overwhelmingly dominant alternative, controlling that network becomes disproportionately valuable. The answer is not to replace Bitcoin maximalism with Monero maximalism. It is to make sure there are always credible alternatives.
Bitcoin should be challenged by Monero, and both should be challenged by everything else capable of doing the job. Different systems should compete on privacy, censorship resistance, security and their ability to function as actual peer to peer cash.
Cryptocurrency was always destined to become squad wealth.
There is a natural economic force behind this. A challenger has enormous potential upside if it takes ground from an incumbent. Its users, holders and developers share in that upside, attracting capital, labour and attention. An incumbent that already dominates has much less upside simply from maintaining its position. By contrast, smaller or emerging systems offer asymmetric returns: if they succeed, early participants are rewarded far more than those in established networks. That dynamic turns participation itself into a form of aligned speculation, where belief, contribution and ownership reinforce each other.
That creates a persistent incentive to back credible underdogs. It can be suppressed through regulation, misinformation or force, but the incentive itself remains.
So perhaps the best thing for Bitcoin is not permanent dominance at all. For Bitcoin to succeed as peer to peer cash, it may need to lose its monopoly on the idea.
The goal is not the end of government. The goal is honest money, accountable government and the end of usury. That does not require one cryptocurrency to win forever. It requires credible alternatives so neither governments nor monetary networks can assume people have nowhere else to go.
The threat of exit is the tension that maintains the balance.
#nevent1q…gn7n

2026-08-11 09:04:17 UTC

This is a must read. Bitcoin was always going to turn into a power struggle between nation states, but this power is very centralised. At least for now, bitcoin requires work for the new coins, so thee is no free ride. But what's the end goal. If it is to kill bitcoin it wont work because the idea remains a latent threat. Bitcoin losing dominance will only open up a path for other cryptocurrency to fill its place. The goal must be to control bitcoin and ensure its dominance while limiting its p2p capacity and ensure it remains transparent. Once the mining reward diminishes, mining can be subsidised by bankingbrevinue to ensure a control of hash power. This outlines how important altcoins are for bitcoins survival as p2p electronic cash. Knots shouldn't have forked to prevent spam, it should have thrown the gauntlet and introduced shielded transactions as mandatory and a small tail emission to ensure proof of work remains a profitable incentive to compete for hash power.
#nevent1q…gn7n

2026-08-08 10:16:14 UTC

- reply

https://listr.lol/a/naddr1qqjxgvrzv9sngwrp95mnvc34956rqdtp94skzvfc956nywr9v5un2drz8pnrvqghwaehxw309aex2mrp0yh8qunfd4skctnwv46z7q3qwvtljy7rmeeeaqat9hwxwq9g7h90ghavtgpvd2yxk400ndlrf4qsxpqqqp6nqkdn5lh

2026-08-05 22:42:14 UTC

- reply

Yeah, sad to hear about his health issues.

2026-08-05 13:11:48 UTC

- reply

Now is a good time to kick bitcoin while its down and steal oxygen from BIP-110. Stocks way overpriced. Its a good time for state level actors to demoralise bitcoin.

2026-08-04 21:11:36 UTC

- reply

Yeah, all this worry about stuffing up dice throws is starting to sound like people not wanting you to be sovereign.

2026-08-04 12:58:01 UTC

- reply

I don't follow your reasoning when you say dice throwing is flawed. Can you explain that in terms of bits of entropy or probability? Dice and similar have been proven to be pretty close to random for milenima.
The broken encryption problem is akin to breaking SHA256, not unknown basis in dice rolls.
A computer could calculate your thrown if it knew the start position of your throws, but unless you are filmed, that's pretty safely unrepeatable to any meaningful extent. Machine randomness is much harder because the quirks that they use to produce entropy are often repeatable, and potentially measured before distribution, or they could just not use any! The trust surface is much higher with any device generated key.

2026-08-04 12:39:56 UTC

- reply

Awesome. I have been trying to vibe code something like that. https://npub1wvtljy7rmeeeaqat9hwxwq9g7h90ghavtgpvd2yxk400ndlrf4qsytjhd0.blossom.band/4d6d8e37bf483b80ee12aad6a6e18ee87ece5da6f3386b157603a784b1c1dba0.jpg

2026-08-04 12:00:54 UTC

- reply

What is the definition of screw up? There will be slight consistencies in how the dice are held and the throwing motion, but if it resulted in a serious basis, it should be possible to practice a statistically significant advantage.
Betting on don't pass in craps, the house has a 1.36% advantage, but there aren't many casinos going out of business.
If your throw is 98% random what is your loss of entropy on a 128 or 256 bit pass phrase? Have you stuffed it or is it pretty much as secure?
I think there is an unnecessary amount of FUD, because it helps sell Coldcards.

2026-08-03 09:57:40 UTC

- reply

If you only use that and not other relays, if someone only has your npub, how do they discover you without querying a major relay in the hope they have your kind 10002 event?

2026-08-03 08:31:46 UTC

https://npub1wvtljy7rmeeeaqat9hwxwq9g7h90ghavtgpvd2yxk400ndlrf4qsytjhd0.blossom.band/e919d7f544a3fe182ab1d87e1d39c462926d60f65f14d272110dda024fa1c5bf.jpg
#meme #FTX #MtGox #Celcius #Coldcard

2026-08-03 07:26:54 UTC

- reply

You need a hash to get the checksum to generate the final word.

2026-08-01 12:21:21 UTC

- reply

Thanks for coming back

2026-08-01 02:44:10 UTC

- reply

Marcus Karpelès wasn't a wanker, just incompetent.

2026-07-31 23:53:43 UTC

- reply

Yeah, but they would want to have a 1oo2 key to a multisig, other wise they wouldn't know if you just spent it and claimed theft.
A better model would be a bank holding part of a multisig in a safe deposit box. No way for them to know what's in there to rehypothicate. But it stops wrench attacks and would have inheretence planning.

2026-07-31 11:40:11 UTC

- reply

Also found this https://bitcoinmagazine.com/culture/diy-bitcoin-private-key-project

2026-07-31 07:52:05 UTC

- reply

Thanks. Started watching it and saw the sponsors ads, lol. Right now my scepticism is off the charts https://npub1wvtljy7rmeeeaqat9hwxwq9g7h90ghavtgpvd2yxk400ndlrf4qsytjhd0.blossom.band/a39de93b788d809f243e750855d26b87f54490913cf82f2ceac7065cfac75e46.jpg

2026-07-31 04:56:50 UTC

- reply

How? Genuine question. I have seen 0 templates for recording rolls and converting them to a bitcoin key or seed phrase ever on nostr or bitcoin twitter, but thousands of posts about hardware wallets.

2026-07-31 04:35:12 UTC

- reply

But again, this vulnerability was from trusting others. In this case the hardware manufacturer.

2026-07-30 02:41:08 UTC

- reply

Not voting is a psyop
#nevent1q…ncw2

2026-07-27 08:34:03 UTC

- reply

Do you know any clients that do this? I have been trying to build an app to view highlights and comments on websites, letting users filter by different layers.
https://blossom.primal.net/20d01e842fec11634515a1505b5a852a2f6bf17bd8bec300f5798a9e79abffc3.jpg

2026-07-26 21:15:27 UTC

- reply

Yeah, it needs layers. The open social graph let's a web of trust be built, but it needs a private layer too. Concord is moving in that direction

2026-07-26 08:22:55 UTC

- reply

Sorry to hear

2026-07-26 03:47:18 UTC

- reply

Sort of.
At a simple level, as soon as people started farming, they created an incentive for violent raiders to come and plunder the harvest. Out of necessary they had to pay a government to recognise their ownership and provide protection. But once that government was formed their source of income was from extracting the labour of others. A neighbouring government that was more successful in harnessing citizens labour could overthrow and conquer the less extractive government. The government must demand a monopoly on violence, on an on until its a massive communist empire.
But larger empires require more bureaucracy which becomes inefficient.
Not all technology enables the violence, some resist it, like castle walls did before dynamite.

2026-07-26 02:25:36 UTC

- reply

It all comes down to the return on violence equilibrium.
If you can be a tyrant, you must be a tyrant, otherwise someone else will be a tyrant to you.

2026-07-25 23:22:13 UTC

- reply

Keen to hear how it goes

2026-07-25 22:16:36 UTC

- reply

Yeah, but we have a social graph, and its not dictated by an instance moderator. I agree that nostr needsnmore work in this area.

2026-07-25 06:29:59 UTC

- reply

Not here for the Normie's.
I think nostr's architecture is better and its starting to work well... Coincidentally when all the "Nostr is dead" FUD kicked in.

2026-06-18 09:14:17 UTC

- reply

Is that an Android app? Ive started vibe coding one so I can highlight. And see a feed of just highlights. They are the highest signal.

2026-06-01 08:53:58 UTC

- reply

The longer I watch Nostr, the more I struggle to believe the8 stagnation is accidental.
It reminds me of what Bitcoin Core did to Bitcoin. The project still exists, the language of freedom is still there, but the useful parts get narrowed, constrained, and redirected until only a very specific version is allowed to survive.
Nostr should be much bigger than a Bitcoin social network. Its core design is powerful because it does not need a blockchain. It should be a neutral social and identity protocol that can support any app, any community, and any payment rail. That is the whole point. It is not beholden to one cryptocurrency ecosystem.
Yet in practice, payments are treated as if Lightning is the only serious option. That immediately limits the appeal to a niche market.
And if we are going to have Lightning forced into everything, then at least use it for what it is actually good at.
Micro payments could be powerful because they break the subscription model. You should not need an ongoing commitment just to read one article, access one feature, boost one post, store one file, use one service, or unlock one piece of content.
That is the point. Pay once. Pay per use. Pay for access when you need it. No account lock in. No recurring charge you forget about. No platform sitting between the user and the service provider forever.
A good Nostr app should be able to say: here is a useful service, here is the price, pay however you want. Use Lightning for instant small payments where it makes sense. Use Monero where privacy matters. Use fiat, cards, bank transfer, or anything else where that works better.
The payment rail should serve the application. It should not dictate the entire culture of the protocol.
Instead, whenever people talk about monetisation, everything gets dragged back toward value for value.
Value for value has its place, but it is not the same as charging for a service. It does not reliably fund infrastructure, support, moderation, development, storage, bandwidth, discovery, or long term product work.
The same issue shows up in the apps themselves. They are trying to chase normies by compromising privacy and censorship resistance for convenience. But what normal person is going to accept worse performance, a smaller social graph, and a niche culture just to use a protocol they do not care about?
That is what makes me suspicious. The obvious path is to build real apps that do something useful, charge directly for the service, and use Nostr as the open social layer underneath.
But the path promoted by the influencers always seems weaker: Lightning only, value for value, half baked social apps, and endless appeals to ideology.
Maybe it is just bad incentives. Maybe it is ideological capture. But when the same weak ideas are pushed over and over, and every commercially useful path is treated as impure, it starts to look like containment.
The best way to stop Nostr is to fund and promote versions of it that absorb the dissidents, keep them busy, and never become useful enough to threaten the platforms.
Nostr should be the open social layer for applications that cannot be captured and don't give away more user data than necessary. Right now, it feels like it is being steered into becoming a harmless Bitcoin subculture.

2026-03-09 10:52:09 UTC

Today our family grew in the most incredible way.
Our baby arrived in what was technically a free birth. Labour moved so quickly that our little one was born at home in the water before the midwives could arrive, surrounded by some of her closest friends. It was filled with love. I was fortunate enough to catch my own child and lift her out of the water into the world, an amazing thing.
After our first birth in hospital, experiencing a home birth was completely different. It felt natural, grounded, and deeply personal. I’m so proud of my wife and in awe of her strength.
What makes today even more special is the road that led here. After years of infertility and miscarriages we had honestly given up hope. Then, not long after she stepped away from work, we were blessed with this pregnancy. It still feels like a miracle.
Our hearts are so full tonight.
Grateful for our growing family, for the friends who were there in that moment, and for the incredible woman I get to call my wife.
https://image.nostr.build/fa2b61e46498689fb2a1c2d093445c9ed77e7235e7286f364a0daa9514f06022.jpg
#homebirth #freebirth #waterbirth