Semaphore: peer to peer crowdfunding with bitcoin \ stacker news ~bitcoin

Semaphore: peer to peer crowdfunding with bitcoin www.youtube.com/watch?v=VHGRQVuVtCY

6235 sats \ 35 comments \ @supertestnet 15 Jan bitcoin

So super. Would be cool to see LN integrated, by merging this with zaplocker pending-payments / hodl invoices. Can think of a few use cases solved by this - not just related to crowd-funding but pooled challenges, holiday fund pots, sweepstakes, gaming & more. With the option to settle-out if not enough traction is obtained.

0 sats \ 4 replies \ @TonyGiorgio 15 Jan

Absolutely terrible idea to lock LN payments for that long.

0 sats \ 3 replies \ @supertestnet OP 15 Jan

If you think it is a bad idea then don't forward payments with long duration CLTVs

I set my zaplocker node to do it and I charge a large amount to do so, and I am pleased with the results

I don't think you are the kind of person who wants to stop other people from doing what they want with their own node. You do what you like with yours and I will do what I like with mine and then the next time I see you I'll hug you (if you'll let me)

100 sats \ 2 replies \ @TonyGiorgio 15 Jan

I said it was a terrible idea, not that I want to come to your house and physically stop you from doing it.

21 sats \ 1 reply \ @supertestnet OP 15 Jan

so I take it you will hug me then?

1000 sats \ 0 replies \ @TonyGiorgio 15 Jan

Ideally after you stop doing it but not a requirement

100 sats \ 2 replies \ @Car 15 Jan

This is amazing Super! I love how simple and easy to use you made if for the creator and pledger. It’s very balanced. This would be cool to add to home page of pleblab.

21 sats \ 1 reply \ @supertestnet OP 15 Jan

Awesome! Feel free to put it there

0 sats \ 0 replies \ @Car 15 Jan

ya I’ll look into it

100 sats \ 1 reply \ @Rsync25 15 Jan

Genius idea! :)

0 sats \ 0 replies \ @supertestnet OP 15 Jan freebie

ty friend! Feel free to contribute to my fundraiser:

https://semaphore.finance/?fundraiser=sprj13n5y0vnu9ajuaund2nxzphy357m82gk7vumup4mys67ketxlsch8wumn8ghj7mn0wd68yat99e3k7mggacq09

100 sats \ 1 reply \ @k00b 19 Jan

What if someone makes a revokable pledge, then the fundraiser pledges the rest themselves?

100 sats \ 0 replies \ @supertestnet OP 20 Jan freebie

Then the fundraiser met the goal and gets the money

This is mentioned in the github and encouraged:

What if people contribute to my fundraiser but not enough for me to reach my goal? If you have enough to make up the difference just contribute your own funds to the fundraiser so that you do have enough. That's perfectly acceptable in my opinion and I hope it is clear to contributors that the recipient can contribute too. source

I also answered a similar question on the youtube video:

isn't it simpler if contributors provide the fundraiser with a signed TX without requiring a specific output amount? He can take the money in both cases, and he can abort the fundraising in both cases If contributors didn't commit to an amount then the recipient could take the money without reaching the goal. I wanted the fundraiser to require him to reach the goal, and that's what my software enforces. Some recipients can fulfill that requirement by simply making up the difference using money they already have (and I encourage them to do that if they have the means), but in many fundraisers that won't work because they just don't have enough money to make up the difference. I think my way is therefore better

600 sats \ 1 reply \ @ladyluck 16 Jan

Geyser is still the best crowdfunding platform especially when it comes to Bitcoin Lightning Network

0 sats \ 0 replies \ @supertestnet OP 17 Jan

Ok I just added lightning network support to Semaphore

Now I have feature parity with Geyser except Semaphore doesn't have any fees (geyser charges 2% on all lightning contributions)

0 sats \ 1 reply \ @theonevortex 16 Jan

Wow this is epic! Fantastic work. Sure hope geyser takes advantage.

0 sats \ 0 replies \ @supertestnet OP 16 Jan

me too!

0 sats \ 1 reply \ @south_korea_ln 16 Jan

Do irrevocable transactions also count to the total for revocable transactions to be valid?

0 sats \ 0 replies \ @supertestnet OP 16 Jan

no but they do count toward the total amount displayed as received

Also: suppose you goal is 1 btc and you end up meeting that goal with 0.5 in reversible transactions and 0.5 in irreversible transactions

You can use your 0.5 btc in "irreversible transactions" to make a contribution to your own fundraiser, bringing it up to 1 btc total in reversible transactions

That's enough to trigger the smart contract so then you can withdraw it all (though you will probably need to add a bit extra to pay for mining fees)

0 sats \ 1 reply \ @Lumor 15 Jan

Thanks for resurrecting Lighthouse, without Java! 😁

1000 sats \ 0 replies \ @supertestnet OP 15 Jan freebie

You're very welcome! It also has some additional enhancements compared to Lighthouse:

To get utxo data, Lighthouse used a p2p network bootstrapped via Mike Hearn's bitcoinXT software. I just use https://mempool.space which is a more centralized way to do it
Lighthouse assumed users keep funds in the built in wallet and then it marked some of them as "do not spend" if they were designated for a pledge. I just have users send the exact amount they want to contribute and don't assume users keep any additional funds in Semaphore
I use a multisig so that other people can't "complete" the fundraiser on the recipients behalf, he has to do it himself. I don't think Lighthouse did that, I think it allowed anyone who saw the published signatures to complete the transaction on the fundraiser's behalf
I have pledgers create 900 signatures in increments of 1% above the goal amount, that way the recipient can take the money even if he 10x's his goal. I don't think Lighthouse did that
I made a mechanism for semi automatic refunds using (again) presigned transactions, where a yone visiting the site 24 hours after the fundraiser ends automatically sends everyone their money back. I don't think Lighthouse had a similar feature
I also have an "irreversible pledge" option where you send the money directly to the recipient without doing any funky signature stuff, and I don't think Lighthouse had that

0 sats \ 1 reply \ @OT 15 Jan

Would a fee spike in the mempool mess this up?

100 sats \ 0 replies \ @supertestnet OP 15 Jan

Mostly no. Pledges do not commit to any fee but rather they use the "anyone_can_pay" flag so that the recipient can add an extra input to pay the mining fee, or he can use "excess funds" over-the-goal to pay the fee. The page tells him what fee he needs to pay to withdraw his funds, if any, and prompts him to contribute that amount. A fee spike would not change that, he could still just pay whatever feerate is now necessary.

A fee spike would affect automatic refunds though. Those lock in the pledger's fee at whatever feerate was in play when they made their pledge, and if fees are higher than that when the fundraiser ends, their "automatic refund" transactions might not confirm. But pledgers can fix this by returning to the page and manually clicking the Revoke button. That will recreate and replace the refund transaction based on the new fee rates, so no one loses their money as long as they keep their backup file (which contains their private key and everything they need in order to create a new refund transaction).