I don't have a send wallet simply because none of my current wallets work well for send without going custodial. Once i exhausted my channels, I'll switch again (shockwallet is up next) and hopefully then it works.

However, if I send you CCs (or sats), it just means I'd like you to post more on SN. It's a compliment to everyone's contributions and an encouragement to do it more.

To be fair, "gaming the system" is what SN's model implicitly assumes as given, and so the solution is to try to design a system that works well even under everyone's own self-interested behavior.

Maybe there should be a small incentive to attaching send wallets, like you get a boost in rewards, or your zaps are worth more trust.

The downside is that it makes it harder for SN to claim that "you can do everything with cowboy credits that you could do with a sat", and that opens up to more accusations of CCs being a shitcoin

Yes, because:

Oh my god I'm blind. Thank you. Leaving this post up for my shame plus others might find it useful. Also I paid for it so there's no point in deleting it now lol.

What Darth is doing is not connecting wallets. That's very different. By connecting a receive wallet and no send wallet, you can get real sats from fellow stackers, but you only zap cowboy credits.

Less but still a shitton.

Edit: making mistakes in custody solutions has been common and isn't a reason I'd pass judgment for. Anyone can make a mistake.

I think its more useful to judge someone by their solutions. In which case I think Luke is often wrong.

I’ve said this before, you can have your sending wallet enabled and still not send any sats!

I feel like I need to explain myself here. I haven’t had my sending wallet enabled for a few months now, ever since Coinos had some issues that were causing my Zaps to fail and were making my experience on SN worse. There are also things like transaction fees and SN privacy proxy fees that I avoid this way. I like having my finger on the trigger and knowing the gun won’t jam! Hahaha.

Thanks for bringing this up.

I agree with you; there's no incentive not to send credits. There was an idea to give out less rewards if credits were used for zaps. @SimpleStacker replied with some feedback and I came to the conclusion that the best thing is to just completely remove sending credits:

I’ve brought this idea up many times since then. I’ll let @k00b explain his side.

In response, I now don’t zap sats myself anymore. Still receiving them though. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

Dear Poet, would you mind spamming the advertiser's link sometimes in the saloon so that I don't forget to buy space on your mag for nonsense that one day may change the world? Thank you.

Remember I'm 2013 class. We're here to remove intermediaries. That was in the whitepaper and that is what drives us. Peer to peer. Not peer to bank to peer. FUCK THE BANKS

They feel like poverty due to insane ecosystem milking by <App/Goog>le¹. PWA integration feels shitty on both platforms because thats what they want it to be: as shitty as possible so that you pay your 30% app store tax - the Goog variant does a little better than the App one and there was talk of the latter wanting to remove support all together². It's insane anyway because these smart phones don't come cheap.

Or lnd or cln. That's honestly what I should personally do as I already have servers, but then I cannot help anyone with just connecting a wallet. I won't know what works then, and I'd like to be in the know and I like testing wallets, but not custodial ones. I'm still thinking that if Blixt/Zeus would have great CLINK/NWC connectivity, then we can probably focus on reducing the energy and data consumption of their embedded LNDs.

Friends don't recommend friends this, I think? lol. Also afaik the LN interface is as custodial as npubcash, i.e. you have no cryptographic / on-chain recourse when the LN channel fucks up?

NWC, when it finally worked for me, with cashu worked okay-ish, except I continuously needed to have my phone open for every zap I did on my laptop. That's a serious disruption of UX. I agree with you that the CC flow is the least disruptive, because it allows to prepay. But I know that people want sats, so if there is something good, even if I need to have my phone open all the time, I will try to be nice and do it, as long as the software is stable and non-custodial.

I could put some minor amount of sats in a custodial wallet, but all of them, as you noted above, are crap, get hacked, go down, rug... all of the shit that is no bueno. That's not what Bitcoin has ever been about for me, so why would I encourage the existence of services like that? I stopped using cashu because I have some unclaimable sats, as that is really not acceptable. No matter the amount; if it happens on a small amount, it will happen on big amounts too. So cashu/npubcash is too custodial as well, at least for me.

There must be better UX for this and I think that with SN there's a good reason to find it. NWC hasn't been it in any current implementation, but maybe we can formulate what's needed?

Hey Jason, perhaps it isn’t clear, but the block weight limit has not changed and is not expected to change. Today, just as any day since segwit activated, the blockchain cannot grow more than 4 MB per block, but in reality, it grows by about 1.6 MB per block. If people put a lot of OP_RETURN data, it would grow closer to 1 MB per block, because output data does not get the witness discount. For all of these reasons, the concern that the blockchain will grow faster due to this mempool policy change is easily dismissed — it’s simply untenable.

As to whether porn will be stored on the blockchain, there has been smut and illegal content on the blockchain for over a decade. It’s an obvious result of a censorship resistant append-only data structure with open write access. You may understand then why that doesn’t keep people awake at night, and why it is hard to admit it as a some sort of changed reality. On the other hand, concern about sitcoms getting stored is just absurd. Even while feerates are pretty low now, blockspace is strictly limited (as described above), and if anyone added to the current demand by trying to store big data files, demand would immediately exceed the blockspace production. As you’d expect, the feerates would shoot up, and storing large amounts of data would be prohibitively expensive. While payment transactions would also get more expensive, they are generally tiny and people would be easily able to outbid other demand for urgent transactions. This dynamic in addition to the initial hype having tapered off, is why all the “NFTs on Bitcoin” crap is at a fraction of its ATH prices: the scarcity of blockspace makes it unsustainably expensive in the long run.

So, in my humble opinion, Mechanic has worked himself up over discovering how things always have been, but ymmv.

Its worse. code analysis? Like Claude finding 0days? Why doesn't it say "hey Claude discovered some vulns and we reported them to the respective software maintainers"? Because how did Claude get the source code? Did it also hack a MS dev workstation and fetch the code?

I have no words.

it is a futile display of self-righteousness, that's what I always tell people when they ask me why I'm never angry.

what's the purpose?

But such stackers do still need to acquire CCs. So either they are receiving them or buying them.

If they have a wallet attached for receiving, they ought to mostly be receiving sats.

So then they are just buying CCs by sending sats to SN. Is it really easier to pay a LN invoice every so often than it is to copy paste a NWC string?

few

I'm actually not super suprised in retrospect, but honestly what I've been blown away by the most is the community response!

I thought the Maps feature in Cash App was pretty cool before we launched it, but seeing the decentralized sales team activate en masse and go tell their favorite merchants to turn on bitcoin payments acceptance was so amazing to see!

Can't judge, I lost coins dumber.