I don't understand KPop. We did these bands 25 years ago here in the USA. I didn't like that music then and I don't like it now. 😎

Let's go Argentina 🫂🤙🏻💜

@Team Soapbox is double dogfooding Armada. well, perhaps it's more like triple or quadruple dogfooding? i originally called for 'double dogfooding' because i wanted us to use Armada for all internal communications and i wanted us to use Ngit for all Armada repository management. the calls were made, and we transitioned. but now, we're using also GitWorkshop.dev or NostrHub.io to view and access the git repo and we're using Armada as a workspace to track issues and develop Armada. i suggested to @Alex Gleason that doing this might make us feel pain, so perhaps we don't proceed with my suggestion and he responded stating perhaps we do need to feel this pain. and he's right. without pain, we can't push forward. how else are we going to know the pain points if we don't feel them ourselves? that said, we might be missing something along the way. so, if you're using any of our tools or using nostr's dev infrastructure and feeling any pain points, please let us know. we want to help everyone push forward.

Governments are pushing digital ID. Platforms are logging who talks to whom. Meanwhile on Nostr we just shipped communities where no server holds your messages, you can't be IDed by an admin, and the network sees encrypted noise. Discord you actually own.

Soapbox

Building an Armada: Our Voyage to Encrypted Communities on Nostr - Soapbox Blog

NIP-04, NIP-17, NIP-29, Marmot, and now Concord. A personal account of every wall we hit trying to build encrypted communities on Nostr, and why we...

Good morning and pura vida, Nostr! We're still having fun here. 💜🫂🤙🏻

Check this out. It's kind of like Chrome OS, but instead of Google, it's Nostr. View quoted note →

From my experiences so far this weekend. Kimi K3 is as good as Fable 5 in terms of output. Fable is about 3X faster. However, Kimi costs about 50% less. How has your experience been comparing the two models?

Bitcoin Core vs Knots and BIP-110. Essentially, one is a config knob you can turn back. The other removes the knob entirely and replaces it with a locked box you can't open. With Bitcoin Core's default mempool policy change, they changed the default value for transaction relay/filtering rules. I'm not a fan of that. I believe it's a dumb call, sets a bad precedent, but in the grand scheme of things, it's still just a default config value. You can change it back. Your node, your rules. Right? That's the whole point of running your own node. You choose which transactions to relay and accept. BIP-110 is fundamentally different. It's a consensus level change that would let miners censor transactions at the block level by enabling selective transaction inclusion based on policy rules baked into validation itself. It's not a simple "change the default and move on" situation that some think. It's actually enshrining censorship into the protocol's DNA. That's a MAJOR shift in thinking and functionality. The distinction matters: • Core default change: Bad precedent, opt-out available → annoying but not catastrophic • BIP-110: Structural censorship of legitimate transactions → attack on Bitcoin's core value proposition.