Your original claim was that the difficulty adjustment makes mining *always* unprofitable. Whether or not a mining corporation is operating on losses at the moment is irrelevant to the fact that your claim is factually untrue. Corporations come and go and unprofitable operations will go bankrupt. The core premise that mining is always unprofitable, as you claimed, though is untrue. A difficulty adjustment of 1-5% isn't going to ruin a miner that is capable of operating with profits beyond that. The current adjustment is looking to be only +0.81%. If a miner was operating in profits this adjustment period, they're likely going to be operating in profit the next as well.

You're right. If mining is so unprofitable, then I guess miners are all just producing blocks out of charity. I mined for a year and a half on a single miner I bought myself. Somehow I survived the dreaded difficulty adjustment!

Strange. Maybe try a different relay?

Ya, renting hashrate is a silly casino where the house (who you're "renting" from) always wins.

That's not true at all. Difficulty, on average, only changes by a few small percentage points each adjustment. So there is plenty of time to remain profitable so long as you aren't getting into mining with an unprofitable setup from the get-go.

Worked fine with Amber for me. I just copied the bunker link it gave me and it connected.

Posting in Nostr that Nostr has failed is quite ironic.

Great article. One thing that wasn't really touched on, although maybe tangentially, is the idea that you could have no idea that you received any on-chain Zap at all. Only two clients support this misguided feature. That means that for all other Nostr users that are using other clients, they could have no idea that they've received on-chain Zaps to their npub. Since most clients (thankfully) don't support on-chain Zaps, their clients have no way of notifying them that they're receiving money to their npub this way. Furthermore, people who are using on-chain Zap clients (Ditto, Amethyst), these clients can't in any way determine if the person they're sending on-chain Zaps to use or have ever used one of these clients. It is far more likely than not that they'll be sending Zaps to a person who won't be notified in any way that they received anything. Putting aside all the horrible practices that on-chain Zaps have for privacy that you outlined, the entire argument for on-chain Zaps at the moment is convenience. But I can't think of a worse UX for a common user than to have build a payment system that will in all likelyihood result in the recipient not being notified that they received anything at all or not having any means for the sender to know who they can actually successfully send money to and who they can't. At least if I try to send a lightning Zap to someone without a LN address, it will say that I can't. That's what proper UX should do.

Same situation here as well. Close one! 😅 WORD5 #600 6/6* (Hard Mode) ⬛⬛🟧⬛⬛ ⬛🟪⬛⬛⬛ ⬛🟪🟪⬛⬛ ⬛🟪🟪⬛🟪 ⬛🟪🟪⬛🟪 🟪🟪🟪🟪🟪 https://otherstuff.ai/word5/

What the heck. I already had it installed on my phone. Haha. I must've downloaded it at some point in the past, but forgot about actually trying it out. Going to give this a try now.

Those are the people that get replaced.

Oh nice. Didn't know about that. I will definitely have to check that out. Thanks.

What a whiny post that said nothing of actual substance other than "fuck Nostr and the people that use it." No wonder no one likes Carvalho.

I also think many people can be classified into all those categories at once, depending on the subject matter. I may be a creator/contributor for one subject matter, but a lurker for another subject matter because either I don't have a strong opinion or because I don't consider myself a subject matter expert in that area despite my interest in it.

Don't put the link in your note! Some noob is going to click it. 😆