hodlbod

I like this a lot as well.

Here's another example:

Technically, yes, the `supported_nips` field exists. But just because you can find a relay that supports the NIP you're looking for doesn't mean you can find that support for a...

That's exactly the thought process I went through leading up to this NIP. There are basically two options for supporting advanced functionality: 1. Add NIPs that relays can optionally implement...

I agree indexers will have centralizing effects, the intent of this NIP is to get ahead of that, and articulate add-ons as discoverable through relays, rather than sitting in front...

I'll also say that my plan for Coracle when I reach the stage where I need some additional piece of functionality that doesn't exist on relays and can't be performed...

@pablof7z you talked about this problem a bunch in the relays panel yesterday, I'd be interested in your thoughts on this as a way to reduce centralization, encourage data locality,...

Coracle merges kind 0's as they come in and re-publish the whole enchilada, however I'm not sure that's a complete solution, since I believe relays treat kind 0 as a...

I don't think kind 0 is for client-specific data, I would prefer to put those in an encrypted replaceable note with a `d` tag.

And putting it in kind 0 increases the contention over the event, leading to more race conditions (clients might want to update settings frequently). It would also increase the bandwidth...