pull down to refresh
10 sats \ 0 replies \ @88b0c423eb 25 May \ parent \ on: Ledn to return to Bitcoin only bitcoin
what's ETH?
but it's not limited to raspberry pi, any hardware can have that. But the raspberry pi by default uses uboot as "bios" which is opensource, so maybe it's more secure than x86 with IME if you're not using coreboot/libreboot. Do I get it wrong?
On the raspberry pi one can also use tow-boot: https://github.com/Tow-Boot/Tow-Boot
Yes, I agree on that specially now that in some countries banks are offering you to "buy" bitcoin that are just digits in your bank account that you can't transfer out, spend it and etc.
Hmm I see your point, and i agree one can be mostly safe with the solutions you propose, but if most average bitcoiners running nodes get blocked, those others that just use it without a node could send tx to other nodes not respecting the consensus rules, right? If that happens most likely there would be a fork as I understand, and would be a war with the state, blackrock saylor wanting the miners to follow their consensus rules....I just want to stress the worst case scenario, maybe that's not how it works.
Indeed a lot have that need. From my walk in linux I have met debian devs that use always debian sid on their desktop. Other general devs love arch. In my opinion and experience I prefer arch over debian sid, as I have have problems with debian sid many times, and arch is very very stable as a desktop, it never breaks just keep it updated and with two kernels installed, I like having the latest kernel and the LTS kernel.
the critics on debian(stable) on the other side is that it takes too long to update. But as my experience goes being many years on linux as as a sysadmin my opinion is that debian is still more secure than others taking a standard isntall and use.
well one can't be 100% sure on that as it depends on other factors...but having everywithng updated as soon is it's out by the devs can bring a lot of bugs, including security bugs. Take the xzutils for example, arch almost fell into it, as debian stable would take much more and many more eyes looking at the core before upgrade that package.
and to be honest I mostly use arch to be updated on linux news, have fun and inflate my ego. Debian just works is more secure and I have more time for other things.
it's not intuitive the one I have the most is when I need to "apt autoremove" on arch, which makes no sense at all....at the end I have used arch for years but my heart is at debian.