405 sats \ 4 replies \ @justin_shocknet 14 Oct \ on: SN elects to go noncustodial on Nov. 5th - FAQ & AMA
My opinion on the motivation for this aside, the UX for wallet connections simply isn't there to support this...
So I've posted a $300 bounty for SN to integrate NIP-69 and NIP-68, which offer far superior UX, better security, and scalability than is currently possible with other wallet connections.
Perhaps others can chip in...
https://github.com/stackernews/stacker.news/issues/1478
write
preview
17 sats \ 2 replies \ @siggy47 14 Oct
Can you give us an idea of how this implementation would improve the UX? It would be great if it simplifies the process. Would a stacker need to have nostr keys, or would that be unnecessary (like NWC)?
reply
143 sats \ 1 reply \ @justin_shocknet 14 Oct
I'm involuntarily off-grid again, so apologies for the brevity...
This flips the nostr pairing scheme on its head vs NWC and adds a new user property, so that you simply provide a lightning addresses and approve (or deny) the request in your wallet
(The wallet has nostr keys for communication, you don't have to yourself in the social sense, or even know about it)
NIP-69 you can think of like nostr-native bolt12 or lnurl-p, and NIP-68 is the reverse to complete the flow.
There's more detailed justification in the respective NIPs and conversations, but here's a video clip: https://github.com/nostr-protocol/nips/pull/1529#issuecomment-2400364120
reply
17 sats \ 0 replies \ @siggy47 14 Oct
Thanks
reply
0 sats \ 0 replies \ @WeAreAllSatoshi 15 Oct
Bounty should be denominated in sats. Just sayin
reply