Hey! Thanks for sharing. Yes, it's an interesting approach, but I have some questions about how Privacy Pass tokens have value or are accepted by different relays. There should be some notion of consensus around the entity emitting these tokens, right? Like bonds, in the case where the issues or the Privacy Pass tokens vouch with its reputation, and that's what makes the PP tokens be accepted. So relay operators should recognize that reputation and allow these tokens to be accepted. How do you imagine this relationship to work? I'm a PP token issuer, and my mission is to grow reputation among relay operators so they accept my PP tokens?

On the other hand, I think that Cashu might be the best fit for this use case since it already can handle some spending conditions like time locks, pay-to-PK, refund paths, and as far as I know, there are some people working to bring zk-proofs to create arbitrary spending conditions. Do you imagine mints and PP token issuers being the same entity, or two separate things, like the mint is used as a 'third party' issuer of Cashu tokens, enforcing spending conditions, and the PP token issuer just issuing PP tokens based on the Cashu tokens you present? I think that other people who might be interested in this conversation are @npub12rv5l... and @npub1klkk3...