Nuh

Working on https://mlkut.org, designer and maintener of https://pkarr.org.

https://nuh.dev

Public Key

npub1jvxvaufrwtwj79s90n79fuxmm9pntk94rd8zwderdvqv4dcclnvs9s7yqz

Profile Code

nprofile1qqsfxrxw7y3h9hf0zczhelz57rdajse4mz63kn38xu3kkqx2kuv0ekgprfmhxue69uhhg6r9vehhyetnwshxummnw3erztnrdaksz9nhwden5te0wfjkccte9ec8y6tdv9kzumn9wsn423qn

Publishing to

Author Public Key

npub1jvxvaufrwtwj79s90n79fuxmm9pntk94rd8zwderdvqv4dcclnvs9s7yqz

Show more details

Last Notes

2026-10-26 09:30:10 UTC

What does it say about the internet and society and game theory and trust minimization and all that jazz, that the "black october" didnt have any effect on your life whatsoever?

2026-10-26 07:27:06 UTC

Another zio bites the dust
#nevent1q…wyt7

2026-10-26 07:00:03 UTC

- reply

You are right that miners have little to lose if they try to fuck with Rootstock, but is only true as long they have nothing to gain too, but they also can lose their mining pool reputation, but then again maybe no one cares. I simply am confortable with the fact that getting 50% of miners to agree to coordinate to do anything is impossible. But that is just me.
There is one alternative that i would consider better which is a Metaprotcol on Bitcoin itself. The block space scarcity and high latency doesnt matter when your needs are scarce but consequential, like a registry or a DAO or managing proof of stake for another layer etc.
Brc20 and the like are already doing that, but they depend on a reference binary with centralized development... one can imagine using RiscZero to create a metaprotocol that is entirey minimal and ossified and thus needs no central authority to ship updates.

2026-10-26 06:51:15 UTC

Pretty happy that Lula won. May the US lackeys never win anywhere ever.

2026-10-25 11:41:09 UTC

This is not true, the problem is that the main expenses still dont accept it, and it has no privacy so even if it does, do you want to let your landlord and local grocery shop know roughly how much you own??
The privacy problem is solvable though, the acceptance is much harder.
But people DO spend it, every time you buy it someone has sold it, most likely to get cash to pay the rent
#nevent1q…46sn

2026-10-24 13:07:51 UTC

- reply

Wont be surprised if this increased their shares price!

2026-10-24 13:02:01 UTC

- reply

No. Miners only merge mine Rootstock because they are getting paid more than the marginal cost of the merge mining. This will always be the case, whether the bridge is secure or not. The bridge security only directly matters to the long term holders of RBTC which indirectly affects demand of Rootstock which affects miners profitability.
If merge miners are still mining Rootstock with sufficient ratio, then they must be invested enough in its security, at least enough to incur the cost of merge mining, and competing with anyone merge mining a fork (votes on which chain is valid).
As a user of a name registry, you shouldnt care at all about RBTC price, as long as merge mining participation is large then you are getting the security of the honest majority mining bitcoin, because they chose to run Rskj, and since we already assume it is hard for them to collude on Bitcoin it is alao hard to collude to fake Rootstock history.
Anyways I have nothing more to say about this, and not invested enough in what do you end up choosing. Best of luck.

2026-10-23 12:47:21 UTC

- reply

Who cares? If RBTC is worth 80k or 50 cents, the name system works just the same. And if the system is designed well, it should work mostly offchain anyways.
But even for use cases that requires long term holding, i would personally trust RBTC to have more value 10 years from now than ETH.
The bridge has performed perfectly so fat, and it will get better with BitVM and eventually if we have a bitcoin softfork... ETH has nothing going for it as far as i can tell other than liquidity, which is barely relevant to the usecase at hand, and it isnt a moat. If Solana and Hyperliquid can do it, so can Rootstock. But Rootstock will always have the best track record in bridging BTC, simply because history of principled development cant be faked.

2026-10-22 06:51:40 UTC

- reply

OTS is not enough you have to force the attacker to publish the fake checkpoint, otherwise there is no cost for the attack and the rational thing to do is to do it just in case the honest chain is not available in the future, in which case you can scam people, for example with network partitioning.
But also none of this actually exists on Ethereum consensus. Some proof of stake chains are built on bitcoin and has these guarantees.
But then the question is why not merge mining, because the proofs of merge mining is actually easier than reading the bitcoin chain and reading checkpoints with all the signatures in them.
Even ethereum people understand that PoW makes light clients much simpler and easier to implement.
Once you are on rootstock, it becomes easier to implement PoS for things that really need it, like high throughput payments, but then the contract state saves you all the work of finding the true checkpoint, as you see in rollups.
Anyways just keep using ethereum if you like. There is nothing at stake here anyways, there is zero demand :)

2026-10-20 11:34:21 UTC

- reply

I mean, even ethereum developers wont make these claims. What you explained is just subjectivity, you are guaranteed to agree with everyone who has been online as often as you are. But it is simply impossible to settle this programatically. I can make a software that looks at all suggested bitcoin histories and return the best chain, and the only assumptions are; 1) 51% of miners are honest (they can revert all history if they work hard and waste actual resources for years) and 2) you can hear of the canonical chain (network partitioning)
Ethereum doesnt have this, because 1) as you said people who unstake waste absolutely nothing 2) even if they dont unstake, they can share a fake history with a zk system without making their signatures public so they cant be slashed, while bitcoin requires energy consumption, not just slashing risk and 3) while a checkpointing node can be safe, that is worthless for any programs or onchain script or any stateless functions
Basically we both agree that you are fine on ethereum if you are constantly online, but anything else doesnt work.
But also, why would i accept ethereum limitations when i dont have to? Any proof of stake system anchored to bitcoin inherits bitcoins strong subjectivity guarantees with one assumption ; the network is ready to challenge checkpoints before they are finalized, as in; most stakers are honest at every window W (say 14 days) in the past.
But even if this assumption doesnt hold, you only lose correctness, possibly, but you never have to wonder what would others conclude, the answer is; exactly what you conclude.
So my question is, why would anyone bother with ethereum for what you are doing? It is not like you need ethereum liquidity or defi

2026-10-19 10:55:23 UTC

- reply

You are wasting your time. Instead you should find users who actually care and give them the service. You cant create demand. Nostr is struggling from much deeper apathy. It is a solution that most people simply dont want.

2026-10-19 10:52:49 UTC

- reply

The real answer is that the current PoWPeg (federated multisig in HSM verifying the merge mining) provides the finalitt, because the software refuses any reorgs deeper than roughly a day.
Theoretically any BitVM or GSR or other trustless bridge mechanism, will also require some delay to consider a block safe to withdraw from, so that would also be an obvious way to measure finality, exactly like Bitcoin is assumed impossible to reorg furthet than 100 blocks back.
So a mining pool of course can reorg anything, but they can only do that for grieving, they wont get any value from it, because whatever bridge you design will provide finality or otherwise be totally insecure.
I explained this repeatedly, sidechains are ephemeral, you cant design a sidechain that doesnt have checkpoints.
The question is, are the checkpoints subjective or objective?
Finality in Rootstock can be objective because everyone going through the history can achieve the same conclusion, at least theoritically with minimal changes to consensus. But also if we just all agree that anything buried under two weeks of bitcoin blocks is final. This is the beauty, bitcoin provides an objective clock.
Ethereum doesnt have this, which is why it is called weak subjective guarantees. Meaning that you cant actually make objective decision that matches what everyone agrees on, not without going online and making some human judgement on which checkpoints are actually valid. Becauase creating checkpoints costs nothing whatsoever. Someone staking eth a decade ago can create whole decade worth of alternative chain and checkpoints, and it is indistinguishable from the canonical chain.
Bitcoin is basically an oracle, it tells you what did majority of people "saw" in the past. Ethereum doesnt have that.

2026-10-07 02:25:50 UTC

Happy Oct 7th everyone, and may more death to zionists be in our near future.

2026-10-04 10:57:54 UTC

If you think BTC is scarce, wait till you hear about PMF!

2026-09-29 06:41:11 UTC

- reply

Facebook has a strong network of real people, all know each other and trust each other... And share countless lies every day.

2026-09-27 13:54:16 UTC

Trying to build the "decentralised digital marketplace of ideas" have always been futile, but now it is not even worthwhile even if possible. It is back to direct messaging and private groups and tightly moderated forums. None of which requires relays or indexers, and would be better served with good old email, with slight marginal optional upgrades, like sovereign identity.
Make sure you take your existing internet friends contacts now before it is too late. Mine will always be listed on Nuh.dev, and eventually on an MNS domain too.
#nevent1q…s99d

2026-09-26 17:35:41 UTC

If they were not genocidal scum, I would have focused more on them being the most cringe and immature scum in history, sovereignty and power doesn't suit them and they can't handle it. They hate responsibility and accountability, they only want power, power to kill children with impunity.
#nevent1q…u5xh

2026-09-26 15:34:06 UTC

- reply

As good opportunity to share how MNS names and avatars look as any; https://testnet.mns.mlkut.org/owner/0x3586e7fd54ec38e737c6d18fec4f7617910523d7 (excuse it if it is slow, I have some bugs I am too lazy to fix)

2026-09-26 15:32:46 UTC

- reply

*256

2026-09-26 15:32:23 UTC

- reply

True Entropy is impossible to reduce ... The reason MNS names are easy to encode, is because they have 40 bits of entropy, not 265.

2026-09-22 08:45:31 UTC

- reply

The real question is why do we invent push notifications schemes when we already have SMTP? What is a notification if it is not a small ephemeral mail?
You literally get notifications mail in the physical mail box... And you get notifications and alerts in your email too, like payments reminders, calendar reminders, and all sorts of ephemeral notifications and reminders.
Not sure why do you think you need something other than SMTP to solve this problem once and for all.

2026-09-22 08:42:57 UTC

- reply

Everything is mail. SMS should be mail, notifications should be mail... It is literally the same function.
Mail doesn't mean you need to read it, it can be your machine is going to handle it.
There is no filling up, that is like saying your phone is filled up with YouTube videos you watch... Sufficiently smart email client can always clean up ephemeral notifications.

2026-09-22 05:48:24 UTC

- reply

The whole concept of "fill up your inbox" is just a failure of UX. We are in the age of smart fuzzy filters, emails should be perfectly capable of garbage collection and not showing you emails that don't need your attention in the first place. It is crazy that email clients still have the UI of a pile of emails with absolutely no organisation. Even chat apps do the basics decency of grouping messagea by contact.

2026-09-21 11:26:26 UTC

- reply

That's the point, almost all notifications (other than emergency calls and SMS and whitelisted email contacts like your boss or spouse) should be asynchronous and batched.
The reason I say email, is because we shouldn't reinvent the wheel. Signal should be an email client, WhatsApp should be an email client etc...
Apps like twitter and facebook and discord etc shouldn't have notifications at all, except through emails.
My point is, pushing data to others has been already solved; email. And notifications already exist for email clients and can be customized there... So why do we keep inventing push notifications again with other weird solutions that aren't email??

2026-09-21 10:31:51 UTC

- reply

By clock I mean when you set alarms ... I guess the calendar belongs to the same category.
I can refine this by saying;
1. Phone and SMS from external sources and strangers.
2. Clock, Calendar, etc for local personally chosen alarms.
3. Email for everything else coming from apps and services etc.
A calendar can belong to #3, but you don't need a backend for the calendar app, as you said it is similar to a clock on your device.

2026-09-21 08:15:03 UTC

The only apps that should make notifications are; Phone, SMS, Clock, and Email. And even the Email notifications are better batched once an hour or more, unless you whitelist contacts for instant notifications.

2026-09-16 19:28:48 UTC

I am constantly surprised how well Mastodon works actually. It needed absolutely nothing more than a fix for identity.
All I want from these networks is being able to follow the feeds I want without mediators. It is what I would have reinvented if I wanted to build a social media based on emails.
I think I will invest more time in it going forward.

2026-09-15 12:04:18 UTC

Centralized exchanges shutting down in bear markets, LSPs are going to do the same. Blockchains will remain the only viable and sustainable system.

2026-09-13 20:25:30 UTC

Letting another man tell you your intelligence score is gaaaay

2026-09-12 15:56:53 UTC

Best tweet in history https://xcancel.com/Yampeleg/status/1737109887627436243?sort=Recency#r

2026-09-12 14:01:56 UTC

I think it is crazy that people don't manage distributing software on a blockchain like Rootstock, it should be the most obvious place for registeries... Yes MNS is one registry, but many registries don't need short names and could be identified by a contract address, allowing teams to manage access to the release rights in more sophisticated ways than any bare keys can including any tricks you can make with advanced multisig constructions, and the cost is irrelevant, you don't release new versions every day.

2026-09-11 14:13:29 UTC

- reply

They can't IPO on merit alone given the Chinese competition... So they are trying to pretend they are the new military industrial complex.

2026-09-09 14:23:32 UTC

- reply

The problem is simply lack of demand. If there is indeed a demand for payments, we could build L3 over Rootstock and it would be glorious. But there is so little demand that people would brush it off as federation, as if they don't use custodial LNs or custodial ecash mints.

2026-09-09 06:37:11 UTC

If you woke up and wondering: "did the jews kill any children today?" The answer yes the did.. the answer is yes every fucking day. They fucking live for that shit, it is their entire purpose in life apparently.

2026-09-09 06:35:44 UTC

- reply

Where? Can't see anything, and even their Comms is garbage and they don't engage developers with public roadmaps as they should. They keep focusing on institutions or whatever and the bridge keeps bleeding.
I would love to see some hopium

2026-08-25 20:04:53 UTC

US wants to blow up the global financial system if the world doesn't fight Iran on their behalf, and Bitcoin is entirely irrelevant almost two decades once inception. Not happy about that at all.

2026-07-16 18:43:30 UTC

- reply

I don't know it's architecture but I am willing to bet there is a fat ass server somewhere that does most of the work ... Listen if all you need is the vibe I can do that, but if we are going to discuss architecture it is not going to be any different than a big server with API, just multiple servers with the same API, basically AppViews or whatever you want to call it, but it is just big things that need to make money somehow because it can't be made cheap.. yes. You can donate to it... But it is a big server somewhere and it needs to be compliant and at least sustainable financially.

2026-06-04 10:46:59 UTC

- reply

The general idea that suddenly the world won't need well crafted UIs and APIs is retarded. People had 3rd printers and before that power tools, yet they didn't suddenly started creating furniture on demand on a whim. This disregard for craft is annoying. Also isn't Nostr a big ass experiment in how useless and worthless quickly developed and thoughtless apps are?

2026-06-01 19:24:28 UTC

- reply

I have signal and Matrix but I don't like it much. I can download Delta Chat again, last time I had no one to talk to so removed it.
Soon we should have our own app to be honest with Mlkut and Peergos or an approximation of it :)
Let me know if you have a preference.

2026-06-01 06:59:28 UTC

I just realised that I have been resisting to sign-up for Signal backup for so long, which tells me I don't actually want my chat to survive long term, I want it to be ephemeral and selectively choose what to backup... This is interesting and I don't know how popular is that preference?

2026-05-09 05:21:04 UTC

- reply

Have you looked into Peergos?

2026-04-26 19:19:08 UTC

- reply

This works with opencode? I assume the privacy assurances are not verifiable outside your app no?

2026-04-22 06:46:44 UTC

Started my day inspired to play with a visualization of decentralised IDs as Go 5*5 board!
https://image.nostr.build/657140ca79fa00f675fe88d68eb0012dd947e920cf953701e3ffdd3c6d20286e.png

2026-04-11 06:37:52 UTC

- reply

Americans complain about wild things :'D as if sanctioning the planet is some sort of a human right

2026-03-11 09:17:32 UTC

- reply

Is that why they are withdrawing THAAD from South Korea? Shaking their allies needed to contain China just to be consistent with the counter-theory? Do you believe that USA has much more weapons than we know so they aren't actually depleting what they need to contain China?
Finally, if the oil isn't going to China it isn't going to the rest of Asia either, who is going to build all the things that the US consumer needs that was entirely made in China? Is the USA secretly reindustrialized already and self sufficient?