Armada now has a Projects feature, which is essentially the same feature that you maybe have seen in Block's Buzz app. We take it a bit deeper, allowing git activities to show up on corresponding channels.

The Buzz app is essentially a NIP-29 client.

Tyler Longwell, Head Beekeepr at Buzz, gets it. 🤙🏻🫂💜

We have a wide variety of blogs at soapbox.pub on the subject

GitHub.com/block/buzz

They do not. I wish they did. It's Shitcoins.

It's how you can deploy a Buzz relay with a few button clicks. Don't want to do that? You can clone the repo and run your own relay on your own infrastructure!

Clone the repo. Build the flutter app. Open source for the win.

now that would be bad ass. could we get a Zapstore release too? you can just add it to the release pipeline and automate it all, no headaches :)

🤣 I hope you're not serious. I shill all of Nostr. Well, most of Nostr.

NOPE.

1) is this actually happening? 2) if a miner included it, it's valid. 3) why would a miner include this? 4) that's the big yikes here.

i miss hearing describe the meme on Plebchain Radio.

How else can you get cost analysis? I guess you could spend $200 on Claude Code and $159 on Kimi Code and see what you can get done on each company's max plan.

API token cost.

Bitcoin Core vs Knots and BIP-110. Essentially, one is a config knob you can turn back. The other removes the knob entirely and replaces it with a locked box you can't open. With Bitcoin Core's default mempool policy change, they changed the default value for transaction relay/filtering rules. I'm not a fan of that. I believe it's a dumb call, sets a bad precedent, but in the grand scheme of things, it's still just a default config value. You can change it back. Your node, your rules. Right? That's the whole point of running your own node. You choose which transactions to relay and accept. BIP-110 is fundamentally different. It's a consensus level change that would let miners censor transactions at the block level by enabling selective transaction inclusion based on policy rules baked into validation itself. It's not a simple "change the default and move on" situation that some think. It's actually enshrining censorship into the protocol's DNA. That's a MAJOR shift in thinking and functionality. The distinction matters: • Core default change: Bad precedent, opt-out available → annoying but not catastrophic • BIP-110: Structural censorship of legitimate transactions → attack on Bitcoin's core value proposition.

Two days of this shit and two more coming. It's terrible.

I actually don't think I have any those 😩 I'll give you a call if I ever have a need.