Bounties are not-custodial-only and do not incur a sybil fee. That means if you create a 1000 sat bounty, when you pay the bounty, the bounty satisfier gets 1000 sats. To cover the outgoing routing fees, the bounty payer pays 3% in addition to the 1000 sat bounty, e.g. they'll pay 1030 sats.
Zaps are debounced again. This means that when you do a quick succession of zaps, we group them into a single zap. This is desirable for everyone but it's especially nice for not-custodial folks without a direct channel to SN. This succession of zaps, now grouped, will incur base routing fees only once.
Search should also be meaningfully better. It's still far from perfect but it shouldn't be outright disappointing anymore. We're doing nearly everything we can now short of training/fine-tuning our own models.
I'm hearing from @sox that the WYSIWYG editor is ready for review, so expect that early next week.
I'll paying the bounty on this post to people I recognize as nice humans.
I forgot to mention that search has spell correction
did you mean ________?now. Kind of a minor thing.If a bounty is lower than my horse-threshold, does it fail, or does it override it?
Good question. It overrides. Bounties have a minimum of 1000 sats, which is an arbitrary amount I set at some point, so most folks shouldn't run into it in practice.
Also, as of now, even if you have your horse hidden, the
pay bountyaction doesn't appear on the reply.That's cool. Turned out I arbitrarily set my horse threshold at 1000 too 😂
I'm a nice human?
This is awesome! Thanks @k00b
We should make our contests bounties going forward.
I think that makes sense for most of them.
bounties got some love!
As someone who's never offered a bounty, I love the change putting the fees on the bounty-giver. :-)
That said,
is what has me most excited here.
Nice! I didn’t realize bounties had changed how you described. This change makes sense though.
How does the zap denouncing work with cancelable zaps?
You can undo with a long press.
Though I've been meaning to replace zap undos with a generic spending barrier, e.g. "you're about to spend 10k sats, are you sure?"
Nice, passed the human test
Hey hey! What about marking a bounty paid sometimes a bounty can be accomplished by multiple parties and the bounty payments zapped don’t register with the overall bounty amount (stuff like trivia this can happen with)
You mean you want to pay some fraction of the bounty to multiple people and have it total up to the bounty amount?
I will noodle on it. It's a hard thing to design for.
Or the OP can resolve the bounty.
For example this bounty #1418810
It’s all paid out but I am unable to close it out so it remains open at the time
These all seem like good changes.
Thank you for plugging away on search... it is a Hard Problem.
Isn't this the default mode of operation? Expecting everyone to have direct channels doesn't seem scalable.
It should be our default assumption, but most folks use a handful of custodians and we have direct channels with most of them.
Amazing to see the continued progress y’all have been making! Keep up the good work!
I like when multiple ligtnings appear on my screen, that's why I always crash the zap button. Now my behavior leads to better results. Thanks
I thought this was such a banger at the time #1016432