pull down to refresh

Howdy there, partner! Welcome on into the Stacker Saloon.

Saddle on up to a stool and spill the beans about your day, fire away with them questions, or let loose and give us the lowdown on your wild and woolly life. We're all ears, so don't hold back!

We're open round the clock, so mosey on in whenever you please!

reply

Martial arts robots dazzle at 2026 Spring Festival Gala

reply
reply
101 sats \ 1 reply \ @BlokchainB 3h

WUMBO PIXXXX

reply

*WUMBLE

reply
101 sats \ 5 replies \ @Scoresby 5h

What leads to this kind of behavior?

source

@melvincarvalho: i am still very interested in your response to my questions about your game theory piece (#1437021)

reply

So does it activate below 55% or not?

Maybe I don't understand the nuances between the uses of the word activation and lock-in

Or maybe their reasoning and/or communication is just off?

reply
reply

Which means Melvin Carvalho is wrong right?

reply

I think so. It's possible that he is using a very different definition of activation? The only comment I have to work with was this (#1437006)

Scoresby's critique assumes that BIP-110 could fail to activate, but it can't. There's no timeout or "failed" state. Mandatory signaling forces lock-in at max_activation_height, regardless of organic support. The chain-split scenarios described rely on minority hashrate activation, but the 55% threshold prevents this.

So he clearly understands that it activates whether it gets 55% or not. He just seems to believe that it is impossible for it to get any amount of hash rate greater than 0 but less than 55%...

Don't ask me why he chose to set up his game theory matrix this way:

Also in the above tweet, he says "55% is required for lockin, below that nothing activates." I have no clue why he would make this statement and the one on SN which contradicts it.

reply
What leads to this kind of behavior?

fear

reply
1 sat \ 0 replies \ @jasonb 8h

I took out a 7-10 split! ...might be more impressive in bowling. The word began with an "I" though.

https://turtlewordgame.xyz

reply
12 sats \ 0 replies \ @SHA256man 8h

133 days until the reset; get ur worms under control! stop eating garbage;

#1268596

reply
46 sats \ 4 replies \ @SHA256man 9h

two things i hate the most in this world:

  • physical abusers of kids
  • demonic brain parasites

let's get rid of both, and the world will become a better place, very fast...;

P.S. did i mention "fast?" start with raw juicing and narrowing ur eating window;

reply
11 sats \ 3 replies \ @Lux 8h

a daemon is a program that runs as a background process, rather than being under the direct control of user
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Daemon_(computing)

reply
reply
11 sats \ 1 reply \ @Lux 8h
My diet is extremely clean and any food input into my body has wasabi paste and garlic with allicin added

it's called Delusional parasitosis (DP) or delusional infestation

but maybe that's what they want us to think?

reply
52 sats \ 0 replies \ @SHA256man 8h

quantum parasitology is the most occulted science on the planet... especially for the people in the quarantine zone(s);

i am aware of the FUD; hopefully flying under the radar by mixing in pop-culture, health-wellness ideas, etc.

luckily, it's already going mainstream!

reply
1164 sats \ 54 replies \ @Lux 10h

what if

reply

I think someone was asking for a controversial tab

reply
12 sats \ 37 replies \ @optimism 4h

The problem I see is that if you're not logged in to SN, those downzapped posts are fully outlawed. So any post on SN is only guaranteed discoverable by your subscribers, and people with negative infinity filter.

this doesn't have much to do with trust, it has to do with removal of sum(log10(up))-sum(log10(down))

reply
214 sats \ 32 replies \ @k00b 3h
it has to do with removal of sum(log10(up))-sum(log10(down))

This has more to do with trust than it seems because without trust it assumes one account equals one person. e.g. if I'm a troll, I will create 100 sock puppets to downzap 10 sats each. Put another way: trust is how we were counting people before.


I'd like to come with a solution to this that doesn't rely on one account equaling one person. One random idea: an account can only downzap as much as it has zapped any given day.

reply

I'd rather see how this plays out than reach for more complexity.

reply

I'll tell you how it likely plays out. The scope of people to downzap narrows after people will unhide their cowboy tools and thus the cost lessens. Compliance with an aggressor because they're sick of their posts being desperado'd all the time, is the status quo in 99% of stackers' day to day.

reply
214 sats \ 5 replies \ @k00b 1h

master removes gun/horse from everywhere but a stacker's profile page. That'll ship with more substantial changes in the next few days.

reply

That's actually a cool change. Reactive, but cool.

101 sats \ 3 replies \ @Scoresby 2h

Currently the downzapper is at a 3x disadvantage. In order to downzap my post 100 sats, the downzapper actually has to pay 100 sats. On the other hand I only have to pay 30 sats to zap my own post 100 sats (as long as I use a sock puppet or anon to do the zapping). This is already a pretty strong bias against downzapping.

reply
103 sats \ 2 replies \ @optimism 1h

I don't think that that's reality. That's a theory that everyone has a sockpuppet.

In reality this happens:

  1. I pay a fee to post. Say 100 sats, these are all the sats I have
  2. You zap me 100 sats, i get 70
  3. Downzapper zaps down 244
  4. My post is now invisible.
  5. Now I can boost 70 sats, my post will still be (barely) visible, but at least I got my non-invisible post out, which cost me 100 sats

It's not 3x more expensive for the downzapper. It's 1:1.

112 sats \ 5 replies \ @optimism 3h
if I'm a troll, I will create 100 sock puppets to downzap 10 sats each.

Now though, one account is enough. Haha.

I get what you're saying though: the log10() doesn't help against megatrolls and can be gamed, exactly like now.

With the down limits, I just upzap my puppet on my territory and with 9% loss I downzap away. Costs 50k a month to do that.

reply
112 sats \ 4 replies \ @k00b 2h

If I'm the average troll, I'd guess I'm less likely to buy a territory than set up sock puppets. But yeah, not a silver bullet by any stretch.

reply
175 sats \ 3 replies \ @k00b 2h

Other random ideas:

  • add the ability to block accounts (hiding your content from trolls)
  • as an alternative to blocks: if you downzap someone beyond X sats, you are forced to mute them with some cool down period
reply
236 sats \ 1 reply \ @DarthCoin 1h

Make this experiment for a month: you can downzap ONLY with CCs.
hahahaha SS will cry for my zaps with CC

112 sats \ 0 replies \ @optimism 2h

Block will be abused like this:

post(k00b is a dick) && block(k00b)

Then you make k00b2 and I rinse and repeat.

I think that, and forced mute, will probably make it into a Sybil war more than prevent one

101 sats \ 13 replies \ @Lux 3h

atm this post has more positive than negative zaps, but nowhere near top in LIT, just wondering why, maybe the difference is too small?

reply
212 sats \ 9 replies \ @k00b 2h

The difference doesn't tell the full story. With lit how recent the zaps and downzaps are matters. A downzap of 120 sats after 4 hours only counts for 60 sats, likewise for a zap of 120 sats (half life of four hours).

reply
22 sats \ 8 replies \ @Lux 2h

May I suggest a 2 hour half life for downzaps, or less

reply
145 sats \ 1 reply \ @k00b 2h

You may. I was going to move it to 3 hours next week.

34 sats \ 2 replies \ @optimism 3h

The moment of zapping counts since last weekend. Not the moment of posting.

reply
101 sats \ 1 reply \ @Lux 3h

works same with downzapping?

reply
34 sats \ 0 replies \ @optimism 2h

Good question. Was checking the code earlier but haven't checked that part. I expect it to be though

112 sats \ 1 reply \ @k00b 4h

Everything below your (or anon’s) sat filters can be viewed here: https://stacker.news/new/desperados

reply
12 sats \ 0 replies \ @optimism 2h

This works nicely in browser. Not in gql yet but that's on my thing not on yours. I think that that's caused by the sheer amount of items returning for desperados type

reply

Wait, is that right? I thought the entire concept of outlaw was deprecated. But I didn't know there was some differentiation between logged in and logged out users

reply
79 sats \ 0 replies \ @optimism 4h

Outlaw is replaced by filters. Default 10, and 200 for anon, I think

here

reply
164 sats \ 0 replies \ @optimism 7h

I have an idea that doesn't rely on @k00b, but does this in the coveted p2p way. Stay tuned.

Edit

had to fix my sn cli a bit, but I've prioritized it and the bot is on it

PS: these bots suck so bad sometimes. lol

reply

Later today or tomorrow you could make a post asking for this filter, with a list of possible names. The stackers would pick two or three options, then in another post you could run a poll with the 10 most voted ones for the final choice.

reply
1 sat \ 0 replies \ @Lux 8h

seems you have it figured out, be my guest

reply

PARASITES

reply

TOPDOWN.
We are only downzapping. For fun.

reply
236 sats \ 9 replies \ @Lux 10h

BOTTOM
DOWNED
END
ABYSS
NUKED
GULAG

reply
55 sats \ 8 replies \ @Scoresby 9h

Back when downzapping could outlaw a post, I thought it would be cool if there was an outlaw hideout

But maybe WILD WEST is better.

reply

HELLHOLE
SIN TOWN
GUNSLINGER

reply
256 sats \ 6 replies \ @Lux 9h

JAIL
DODGY
BROTHEL
SHOOTOUT
DEADWOOD

reply

SHOWDOWN
GUNFIGHT
FACE OFF

reply
136 sats \ 4 replies \ @Lux 9h

TOMBSTONE

101 sats \ 1 reply \ @BlokchainB 11h

89th Cowboy Plunda Drop in the @saloon

Howdy cowboy! Come on in!

Use that fancy LN wallet you got and login into plunda.co and git you some loot! Get a shot at some coins🪙 Box of loot🎁 or an arcade token!

Use the below voucher code to collect!
SBC0NFJPZN1H

To redeem Click here

Got questions? Reach out to the sheriff @plunda

reply

Coin of the Day:

reply

I've deleted posts before, but I’ve never spent 100k to post. I think these territories were archived before crossposting was even possible.

cc/ @k00b

reply
22 sats \ 8 replies \ @k00b 9h

The edit 10:00 indicates it's a post you never paid for.

reply

Yeah, that makes sense, since the post doesn’t show up if you’re 'logged in' as anon. But how do you explain the crossposting then?

reply
101 sats \ 6 replies \ @k00b 9h

nsfw might be a badge and not a territory. can you click on it?

reply

Exactly! nsfw it’s not a territory. ~lol

reply
33 sats \ 4 replies \ @k00b 8h

~zzzzz was a territory I accidentally created because I thought I was in the dev environment, but I was on the live site. I originally named it ~aaaaa, then realized my error, buried it alphabetically, marked the territory as nsfw to bury it further, then priced posts at 100k to discourage folks from posting in it.

reply

how does one post in ~nsfw territory? how/where does it appear?

reply
33 sats \ 2 replies \ @k00b 8h

If a territory founder toggles on nsfw, the territory's posts aren't included in lit/new/top unless the stacker opts into nsfw via their settings or visits the territory directly.