pull down to refresh
22 sats \ 1 reply \ @nout OP 10 Sep 2021
From recent podcast with John Vallis, Breez is adding support for chat (with Matrix) and videos soon. By the end of the talk they confused and said "Stacker News" instead of "substack" ;)
reply
0 sats \ 0 replies \ @k00b 10 Sep 2021
Awareness is growing muhahaha
reply
2 sats \ 7 replies \ @nout OP 9 Sep 2021
@k00b, would it make sense to provide Lightning address to the Stacker News users? :)
Wouldn't that be cool? It could be used together with the tipping feature you are working on.
reply
3 sats \ 6 replies \ @k00b 9 Sep 2021
One step ahead of you https://github.com/stackernews/stacker.news/issues/34 😉
reply
1 sat \ 5 replies \ @nout OP 9 Sep 2021
Well now that I know that you have already thought about it - how come it's not done yet? :-D :-D
reply
3 sats \ 4 replies \ @k00b 9 Sep 2021
Time is limited my dude. I'm doing this all alone. Building, design, "marketing", "community building", funding. I'm chipping away at what I can as fast as I can. Not a complaint, just a reality today.
I've also had a few small contributions on github which I'm super grateful for of course.
My current tentative priorities are:
- tips
- user profiles (bios, profile images, "send me money" with lighting address support, etc)
- make the project more contribution friendly (document api, docker test image)
We'll get there!
reply
1 sat \ 3 replies \ @0391398253 10 Sep 2021
Have you ever thought about allowing users to fund development?, Like bounties or a market?, Users want X feature, a dev make a proposal and users decide to fund it or wait for another?, Could be an interesting experiment about community paying for features.
reply
0 sats \ 2 replies \ @k00b 10 Sep 2021
tldr; It's something I think about but I haven't come to any conclusions on yet.
I've thought about it abstractly but not concretely. It might overcomplicate things - I'm going to continue spending down my time on the site regardless. It's just a matter of prioritizing things.
Frankly, if someone simply "donated" significantly to the site (should I give them the ability) and wanted a feature prioritized, simply by stating they wanted it I would prioritize it. It doesn't even have to be a financial donation though - e.g. I've had a user spend time educating me on WebLN because they wanted it, and I put it in immediately.
The real underlying problem is people say they want lots of things that they don't actually want (e.g. Fold users say they want the spinner removed because it's psychologically manipulative, but they stop using Fold when it's removed). But - if users put skin in the game for a feature (like fronting a bounty), I can be reasonably assured they actually want it. This is a crisis every product has. You have to read between the lines of your user's requests.
@nout participates on the site a lot, i.e. he has skin in the game, so I know he thinks lightning addresses are good for the site when he says it (and it affirms my own desire to have it and it's not a dramatic change or anything).
Perhaps the move is donators would be given special feature request priority. Without more devs working on the site, I think anything more would probably be overkill. I haven't yet see a bounty economy thrive in Bitcoin open source projects yet (even much larger projects), but one certainly could emerge.
reply
1 sat \ 1 reply \ @nout OP 10 Sep 2021
I don't have good answers, but I'm fully supportive of resisting the urge to implement everything the users ask for :)
One suggestion I would have is putting together a high level vision somewhere on github and breaking it down by some ideas for projects - if people get excited about the vision, it's more likely they will be excited to help the projects on the road to that vision. There are many organizations in Bitcoin that would be happy to support specific projects towards a solid vision.
Also, to be clear why I would like Lightning address is because I selfishly didn't find any other lightning address provider that would work for me and here I already have a lightning "account". I didn't think through deeply what would be the implications, but having such "side service" may be the right combo for the community. Or maybe not.
reply
1 sat \ 0 replies \ @k00b 10 Sep 2021
Really like the public roadmap idea. It's mostly in my head.
I want Lightning Addresses too, selfishly. I don't use other services that have them and want to mess around with them. I think being a straightforward test ground for these new lightning features is one thing that attracts people to SN so it's definitely good for the site. (The most remarked on feature of SN to date is lnurl-auth, and I suspect a great lightning address implementation will also stimulate interest.)
reply on another page