Thread

Replies (60)

They don't need to care about Nostr anymore than they cared about http to use LNURL, as long as it just works. Bolt12 simply doesn't work, only a few privacy larps really cared, and they were completely wrong about blinded paths. It was always just astroturf by Spiral and minor implementations jealous of LND's market share. The separation of concerns is key, not having to trust a nostr relay because of the encryption/signing already provides an instant transport network with the same accessibility of LNURL. Nostr is also bi-directional, it's not just noffers, but ndebits and nmanage for offers. Offers themselves provide flexible arbitrary data payloads for product details. (t-shirt sizes, sku's, zap receipts etc)
They're centralizing in social contexts because they're used for discovery and feed subscriptions, but as an RPC transport they're encoded in each noffer and only for ephemeral interactivity, not passively. They're also not reliant on TLS since you can run a relay without SSL and just address it by IP From a privacy standpoint, all the keys used in CLINK are wrapped as to not keep a social identity tied or hot on a service endpoint. A node can use as many as it wants for disparate offers/users. The payloads themselves are encrypted so it's only the kind metadata viewable, but yea NIP42 would be a good add here, actually got a PR for that I need to review on our reference server.
You delegate to the wallet to pay an offer. The fact that there’s a thing called an β€œinvoice” exchanged is irrelevant (and an unfortunate naming mistake). If you have a built-in wallet, you delegate to that. If you use NWC, the new spec is defined in terms of offers, not invoices. The payer has no need to ever see or think about that invoice, it’s entirely a lightning-internal thing.
I don't like many aspects, it was completely contrived from a lack of principles by the minor implementations pushing the mobile node fantasy. Even if I didn't care about jpegs on Lightning: - The performance/reliability are a non-starter - It doesn't do bi-direction for commercial applications - It puts the concern at the wrong layer, the payments layer protocol versus the Line-of-Business Application - My underlying principle is that Lightning is the native money of the internet, so things MUST work in a browser (but not reliant on on that web tech you can still QR code a noffer with just a relay ip and node pubkey) - If you want to add functionality, the SDK doesn't touch your underlying node implementation or the BOLT specs and can work with any of them Nostr offers checks all those boxes, with the added benefit of having an identity layer that can be optionally leveraged along side it.
1. what are the issues with performance and reliability? socket perf with noise is better than tls 2. bidirectional comms are supported via a persistent lightning connection and bidirectional packets. commando is and example of this 3. is this really a big deal 4. it does work in the browser, i have demos (like lnlink.org) that shows fetching invoices over lightning (bolt11 ironically) i think nostr is cool, but making that a requirement for all lightning applications seems wrong
Right, wallets should (though I don’t know about currently) support either setting the payer_note or signing a message with the payer-key as a part of generating proof-of-payment, both of which would suffice. Definitely need to spec that part out and make sure wallet support it as a part of the BIP 353 payment proof logic, but I don’t think exposing BOLT 12 invoices outside of the LN wallet makes sense.
1) It mimics Tor, each hop is added latency and failure probability, whereas Nostr being a web server is the same performance people expect from any website 2/3) Bi-direction needs to be at the app layer if its to be used in commerce, payments often have additional context... you're not firing the zap receipt from Lightning for example 4) That appears to be a middleware plugin to talk websockets, since the browser requires websockets... nostr is just json and websockets already
Rusty did afaik yes, while Spiral did much of the NGO-level astroturf. Both representing minor implementations focused on the mobile node fantasy. I recall one such use-case in the repo discussion being Fedimint/Liquid related shitcoinery. Solving the transport of bolt11's would have been adequate if that wasn't their priority, not a whole new BOLT to poison the protocol-level. The shit that comes out of the NGO's and Blockstream have been a reliable counter-signal in every regard.
This is why LNURL and NIP-05 is flawed. Centralized HTTP DNS servers are not the way. I ran across this last night from @Tim Bouma and it’s an interesting approach to the issue. We should look into BitTorrent Mainline DHT as well. πŸ€³πŸ”πŸš₯πŸ›œπŸš₯πŸ›œ The primal.net http service is down because the data is in CloudFlare. The funny think is that CloudFlare tunnels to physical infrastructure would work. image View quoted note β†’
This is why LNURL and NIP-05 is flawed. Centralized HTTP DNS servers are not the way. I ran across this last night from @Tim Bouma and it’s an interesting approach to the issue. We should look into BitTorrent Mainline DHT as well. πŸ€³πŸ”πŸš₯πŸ›œπŸš₯πŸ›œ The primal.net http service is down because the data is in CloudFlare. The funny think is that CloudFlare tunnels to physical infrastructure would work. image View quoted note β†’
For β€˜nostr’ to truly be a decentralized system, you need to host your own servers from home. Depending on whether you can host your own servers without relying on external services, but to do so, you need to know how to open ports on your router, reverse proxy tools such as nginx, apache2, and how to use the terminal.