rich1.0Tim Bouma (npub1q6…nx7d5)https://yabu.me/npub1q6mcr8tlr3l4gus3sfnw6772s7zae6hqncmw5wj27ejud5wcxf7q0nx7d5njumphttps://yabu.meHear me out. It wasn't my idea to expose a private key for Nostr Silent Payments. It wasn't even in the original proposal until I began to explore using the Sparrow Frigate server and what is proposed in BIP352. I've concluded that sharing any form of a private key (hardenened derived or otherwise) is a BAD IDEA! Telling a user to share a private key, even though it is hardened is IRRESPONSIBLE. So please redirect your private-key-sharing rage to the authors of BIP352 who introduced the concept in the first place. I am also coming to the conclusion that BIP352, though it has some great ideas, is a DANGEROUS PROPOSAL on its own because it encourages a user to expose a private key, if doxxed, exposes all of the donors to the silent payment address. Though the spend key is still safe and the funds are safe for the recipient, it introduces a risk for any sender/donor to that address. The receiver can issue a new silent payments address, but the DONORS REMAIN EXPOSED. If you care about your own privacy and security, and don't really care about the security and privacy of the donors who send to you, then BIP352 os great! But otherwise, I considering BIP352, on its own, a DANGEROUS PROPOSAL. Read all about it below: Direct excerpt from BIP352 "Spend and Scan Key Since Bob needs his private key b to check for incoming payments, this requires b to be exposed to an online device." https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/BIP_0352