Oddbean new post about login | logout Cashu moving to charging fees on mints is IMHO a premature optimization. Let the users try the system first. https://m.primal.net/LGOL.png
1 sat fee solves many DDoS scenarios, and it's not a problem for the users I think
I get that, but I think people need to be able to try the system first, without fees. Even if its just on testnet.
all wallets now have higher fees, even custodial ones I think
Even on lightning? We need to fix this if we want fine grained machine micro-operations in future.
unless u use your own lightning node, yes. Nah, I don't think we need to fix this. If communications needs to be cheap, just don't use payments
I'm thinking in the future, machines will need machine to machine tiny payments for small tasks.
Also 1 sat is too high for many machine based system, at scale. Msats (like lightning) could be better.
if 1 sat is too high (right now), then it's better so send the signal in another way I think
We can do 1 msat.
Ooooooh, of course 🤦♂️
Great I get to communicate all that to the user now 😹
This is not an option, I can tell you that 🤣 https://cdn.satellite.earth/3caca6ff3c8158c737b8b56300c2fc1c8e33015f5565626371459c917ed907c5.png I think the msats part can mostly be ignored in the UI, besides detailed transaction views.
You also pay that fee if both parties use the same mint? If so, why?
yes, the mint fee is to compensate for the work it does. If two people are paying each other across mints, then they'll pay for the mint fees + lightning fees To understand why let's look at the steps involved in a normal transaction. 1) Alice has an ecash banknote on MintA 2) Alice sends it Bob At this point, both Alice and Bob own the ecash banknote. This is problematic, because Bob wants to have unilateral control of that banknote. To do that Bob 3) Request a new banknote from MintA. MintA invalidate the old banknote, and gives a new one to Bob, that only he owns. So to prevent MintA being DDoS attacked, MintA charges a fee for every request.
So on step (3), the mint cannot do stuff like "rate limit" the amount of re-assignments that happen on the "same" banknote? Auth is obviously a no-go. And the mint wants to make money, so yup I get it. Sucks for the UX tho. Paying ⚡22 to zap ⚡21 isn't the same 😿
Maybe it's possible, but it is quite complex because the mint would have to track how many times a "chain of banknotes" is moved around, and I am not sure if that's compatible with "pay to npub" types of tx, which work differently. Even if possible, that's too complex imo.
It seems strange that zaps are free, and that cashu, charges. I agree it's going to be tough on the UX. My point is more around letting people try the system first, get used to it (like with zaps), before adding the complexity of transaction fees.
Yup agreed! mSat fees are a lot more elegant + align incentives better
DoS ptotection
Why don't you contribute code instead of being an annoying reply guy
Same energy as the fiatjaf note.
Stop trolling. I have contributed code to cashu, as you well know. You could just say thank you.
Not really.
Except for the decoder which you haven't touched for over half a year of me asking politely.
You're paid to work on Cashu; I’m not, and I’ve got other priorities. If you've changed the format, feel free to submit patches—I'm open to them. You’ve mentioned before that the decoder I wrote was useful, but I’m not obligated to provide free work because the spec has changed.
😂 this idiot tried to do the same with me. He keep trolling and saying shit to the people trying to contribute to his project. I completely lost the interest in this shit. I barely join nostr now only to see the other puppets jack is paying to act like full narcissist and stop the real alpha to float to the top. To be real jack and elon had a great vision to divide the community and destroy the innovation while at same time they rebrand old ideas like this eCash dinosaur vision while we forgot about the block size wars and how it take all energy away from bitcoin.
I don't know who you are and I don't remember you contributing to Cashu.
Are you not the one being an annoying reply guy? It seems like Melvin's post wasn't a reply to you, it was a whole different type of response. He was talking about you and what you said, not talking to you about what you said, or am I missing something?
