furio

Think privacy first. Act freely.

Enforce the 10th Amendment.

Public Key

npub1jxjmyk2zfmfnn5uveg88kvrtcxlkfzcvxj54q8ht795mzypxq7sqtd0mdf

NIP-57 Address

Profile Code

nprofile1qqsfrfdjt9pya5ee6wxv5rnmxp4ur0my3vxrf22srm4lz6d3zqnq0gqpz3mhxue69uhhyetvv9ujuerpd46hxtnfduqs6amnwvaz7tmwdaejumr0dsm3kmuh

Publishing to

relay.damus.io

nos.lol

Author Public Key

npub1jxjmyk2zfmfnn5uveg88kvrtcxlkfzcvxj54q8ht795mzypxq7sqtd0mdf

Show more details

Last Notes

2024-09-12 00:51:05

@nprofile…swg4
I deposited some sats to a different mint than the default, and the chat page won't let me send, it still has the requirement to "deposit ecash to start a chat"

2024-09-09 15:20:35

- reply

So Alice has a phone (this is the acquiring device) and tries to pay for coffee at a merchant (Bob's Coffee). The offline "device" is Alice's phone? The acquiring device is some third "acquiring agent" that has to do with nostr (nostr safebox)?
If true, a user could have a home (online) lightning node, and keep a key to use the node on a phone that needn't be online, and spend by just (somehow secretly) passing the key to the coffee merchant?
Could cashu stored on nostr locked by a private key also do the same thing, a lot easier? Offline I could keep ecash tokens on my phone, which is one way. Or I could store them on relays (as private notes) and unlock them (with a private key app on my phone (could be offline)), and send them to the merchant.

2024-09-03 18:16:22

- reply

Would like to see a comparison:
SimplexChat vs Keychat
I think @npub1h0u…rwx8 did a comparison, can’t remember

2024-09-03 17:41:13

- reply

Assume everything is readable.
Fund privacy tools.
Keychat fixes this *
#privacy #keychat
*hopefully

2024-09-01 05:18:59

- reply

They can post on nostr under the same name and as long as Brazil can’t prove it’s actually them Nostr should fix that.
Famous Brazil account nyms should pop up and start posting.

2024-08-30 06:09:34

- reply

And even if they never do any of the bad things with your data, normalize the fact that privacy is a right, it’s not a crime, it doesn’t mean you have something (bad) to hide.
*They* are in the wrong for invasive intrusion on your right to privacy and they should be rebuked.
Companies should be shamed and criminally prosecuted for collecting data without permission.
We need to go on offense.

2024-08-29 18:07:22

- reply

The link has https which I think fails, that might explain it

2024-08-29 17:51:28

@npub1n3s…te5l
On Peter’s podcast, Troy Cross on:
The crowd booing a democrat: “Booing the democrat was maybe not as smart on behalf of the crowd because we need bitcoin to be adopted.”
Trump promoting Bitcoin: “pandering and servicing an industry.”
While logically consistent, see if you can spot a bias.

2024-08-29 15:50:53

- reply

I agree that cashu is better, and a good choice for your use case.
And maybe cashu would be the "standard" payment processor in my super app, for the reasons you stated.
Self-custodial lightning is ideal for the spending wallet. Cashu solves the uncle jim, the offline, and the not enough sats to justify the fees problems.

2024-08-29 15:42:27

@npub1h0u…rwx8
why is your website not available over the TOR browser?

2024-08-29 15:37:08

- reply

nostr login should be the standard. All apps and websites hopefully cave eventually to this reality.
Your example of cashu manages the stamping demonstrates my idea. Your app needs a monetary layer, and it would already be built in. You don't need to "support" cashu, you just need a standard plugin. If the user uses Fedi, your stamp is paid and the message is sent. A sat is a sat.
You would be able to divert dev resources away from all the changes to the cashu protocol, and just maintain the payment protocol standard. It would free the user to select something they like better. There are users who would not use your product *because* you chose cashu.
Down the road, if fedi "wins out" and cashu becomes marginalized, you would have to do some restructuring.
I like standards and modularization. Its freedom increasing.

2024-08-29 14:49:17

- reply

I like how Signal is available as an SMS app on Android. Even though it doesn't help privacy over SMS it helps adoption, which then pushes more people into the privacy preserving part of the app. This should be done with keychat if there's no compromises on the number one goal of perfect privacy.
I'm more of a fan of cashu than fedi, but listening to a podcast about the "superapp" concept of fedi got me thinking. The "mods" concept and the open source of the superapp by Jan 3, 2025 could be an opportunity. If you convert the superapp to a "protocol" that apps can plug into, it could become indeed super.
Create hardware that only needs to have data, and runs the app. Then for messaging, "mods" plug in your favorite messaging app (keychat?), then if the CEO gets arrested, you switch messaging apps to your next favorite, and competition wins.
You plug in your favorite payment app (self hosted cashu.me wallet), and if a better one comes along, switch.
Phone, maps, all plug in. Everything that plugs in has the ability to receive payments seamlessly from whatever standard-compliant payment app the user has plugged in, so from the company perspective, they don't need to program and pay for a "payment processor," they just plug in to the protocol.
With standards on this "protocol" we can have seamless, privacy-preserving competition for the best UIs with no "ecosystem lock-in".

2024-08-29 14:28:44

- reply

on WhatsApp E2EE:
Reported messages: If a message is reported to WhatsApp, the company can access the content of that specific message and a few messages around it for moderation purposes.
"A few messages around it" ???
This app should not be able to claim E2EE if they have access to a key.
"Yes, your house has deadbolts, but the government has a key, you know, for your safety."

2024-08-29 13:57:15

- reply

Thinking about the last sentence from a privacy perspective.
I don’t want to use an app that must follow all the oppressive regulations from all the governments in the world. Then essentially I live in the most authoritarian state, because my speech is regulated globally.
Nostr doesn’t need to follow these rules, it’s just a protocol.
If they came after Will and said Damus had to give someone up, he doesn’t control the relays.
So it really comes down to the relay owners. Many jurisdictions, many relays, and it slowly trends towards censorship resistance.

2024-08-29 06:51:48

- reply

I think that’s overkill.
I think 2fa is probably good enough and much more user friendly.
Key stored in app, then on signing a pop up app or extension with second factor is secure enough.

2024-08-29 06:43:11

- reply

Amazing decentralization here. 50 governments competing for your tax dollar is a wonderful idea.
The single biggest gain in quality of life for every American would be to strictly enforce this amendment.
Vivek had some good ideas. It would be a start.

2024-08-29 06:39:50

The 10th Amendment to the United States Constitution states:
“The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.”

2024-08-29 06:27:19

- reply

Use privacy tools.
I’m beginning the path of disappearing my identity.
Changing to a nym from an established nostr profile is step 1.

2024-08-29 06:24:24

- reply

You control the client and the algo, so Nostr fixes this.

2024-08-29 06:23:04

- reply

Simplex looks promising.
Telegram is dead to me.
Fingers crossed for keychat cuz I want cashu to be a thing.

2024-08-29 06:20:26

- reply

Nostr login should become the standard.
There’s payments built in, so the incentives are there from the business perspective.

2024-08-29 01:24:03

- reply

just make the code nuke the follower list every now and then.
problem solved.

2024-08-29 00:45:41

United States v. Moalin (2013)Issue: Four Somali immigrants, including Basaaly Moalin, were convicted of terrorism-related charges after the government used evidence obtained through the NSA’s mass surveillance program under the PATRIOT Act. Moalin appealed, arguing that the surveillance violated his Fourth Amendment rights.
Outcome: In 2020, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that the NSA's bulk collection of phone records was unconstitutional under the Fourth Amendment, citing the lack of judicial oversight and the violation of privacy rights. However, the court upheld the conviction, finding the collected data had minimal impact on the case.
Impact: The case marked a significant judicial acknowledgment that the NSA's mass surveillance program was unconstitutional.

2024-08-29 00:45:24

Mayfield v. United States (2007)Issue: Brandon Mayfield, an American attorney wrongfully detained by the FBI due to a fingerprinting error linked to the 2004 Madrid train bombings, sued the government, claiming that the surveillance and searches conducted under the PATRIOT Act violated his Fourth Amendment rights.
Outcome: The U.S. District Court for the District of Oregon ruled that certain provisions of the PATRIOT Act were unconstitutional, particularly regarding the government’s use of surveillance and searches without a warrant. The government later settled with Mayfield and issued a formal apology.
Impact: While the case did not lead to broader changes in the PATRIOT Act, it highlighted potential constitutional violations under the Fourth Amendment.

2024-08-29 00:45:09

Jewel v. NSA (2008)Issue: The Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) brought this case on behalf of Carolyn Jewel and other AT&T customers, challenging the NSA’s mass surveillance programs, which were justified under the PATRIOT Act and other laws. The plaintiffs argued that the bulk collection of internet and telephone data violated their Fourth Amendment rights.
Outcome: The case has been ongoing for years, with some setbacks for the plaintiffs due to state secrets privileges invoked by the government. However, the case has raised significant constitutional questions about the breadth of government surveillance.
Impact: While the case has not yet resulted in a definitive ruling on the constitutionality of the PATRIOT Act, it remains a key legal challenge in the debate over surveillance and privacy.

2024-08-29 00:44:49

United States v. Warshak (2010)Issue: This case involved the government’s warrantless collection of emails from Steven Warshak under the Stored Communications Act, which was expanded by the PATRIOT Act. Warshak argued that the collection violated his Fourth Amendment rights.
Outcome: The Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that the government violated the Fourth Amendment by obtaining Warshak's emails without a warrant, establishing that individuals have a reasonable expectation of privacy in their emails.
Impact: Although not directly a challenge to the PATRIOT Act itself, the case set a precedent regarding electronic communications and the need for a warrant, casting doubt on the constitutionality of certain surveillance practices under the PATRIOT Act.

2024-08-29 00:44:32

Klayman v. Obama (2013)Issue: Attorney Larry Klayman filed a lawsuit challenging the NSA’s bulk data collection program under Section 215 of the PATRIOT Act, arguing that it violated the Fourth Amendment.
Outcome: U.S. District Judge Richard Leon ruled that the NSA’s metadata collection program was likely unconstitutional under the Fourth Amendment. He issued a preliminary injunction but stayed it pending appeal. In his opinion, Judge Leon called the program "almost Orwellian."
Impact: The case contributed to the growing legal and public opposition to mass surveillance but did not result in an immediate halt to the program.

2024-08-29 00:44:06

ACLU v. Clapper (2015)Issue: The mass surveillance program under Section 215 of the PATRIOT Act, which allowed the National Security Agency (NSA) to collect telephone metadata on millions of Americans, was challenged by the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU).
Outcome: The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit ruled that the bulk collection of phone records exceeded the authority granted under the PATRIOT Act. The court did not rule on the Fourth Amendment violation but did state that the mass collection was not authorized by the statute itself.
Impact: Although the court did not directly address the Fourth Amendment, it found that the program was illegal, leading to the passage of the USA FREEDOM Act, which curtailed the bulk data collection practices.

2024-08-29 00:41:56

Fourth Amendment
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

2024-08-29 00:30:54

How do I get one of those cashu.me nip-05s?
@nprofile…9jpj