pull down to refresh
27 sats \ 0 replies \ @BitcoinMaximan 19 Jul \ parent \ on: bitnodes.io tor node count continues to fall bitcoin
It's not crucial for the bitcoin network since blocks are ~10 mins apart. Also, home nodes are probably low on incoming nodes (the other nodes to which you will relay new blocks/transactions). The nodes that do most of the work are public nodes in cloud environments with good connections and hardware.
It's not a nightmare and if you don't want to leak your home IP address you'll want to use Tor or I2P. Latency is irrelevant for new blocks and transaction publishing
It is, in fact, inherently centralized because there is no incentive to run a relay. This shouldn't even be a discussion.
I think its called a "sting operation", and yeah, my thoughts too. They were certainly "asked" to cooperate a while ago, they cooperated, and once the real target was identified the sting is done.
Wtf is Turbo? Anyway, I'm glad TypeScript is getting what it deserves. It's an abomination of a language. The trend to squeeze strong types into languages whose purpose is to be non typed needs to stop.
I don't think this scenario is discussed, so here:
- We see a large hashrate drop (kinda like summer 2021)
- The drop is actually an entity starting to silently mine (mining blocks on its own without broadcasting blocks to others).
- They acquire more hashrate than the publicly known hashrate
- Their chain is always longer than the real network chain (if they keep up with the public network hashrate growth)
- After a while, they broadcast blocks, all nodes do a massive reorg because the protocol always favors longest chain.
The aftermath would be disasterous, since all transactions which occured during the time would be invalidated. Altough it's probably impossible to do, this would, in fact, harm bitcoin. This why, imo, it's important to have a steady hashrate growth, without massive drops.
Yea, well, the starting comment of this thread was "are you a bitcoiner if you run your node". Yes, if you run bitcoin node with no incoming connections you are running bitcoin. If you are having incoming connections you are also helping the network. Ofc, not all users should be expected to do this, and defauly max incoming/outbound connections are 120/10 for a node which probably is enough to keep the network healthy.
I think the reason you can't open other channels is because Phoenix connects to a trampoline node, which not many implementations support and even fewer actually run.
As for the backup seed, I've always thought that in case of a channel force close you can reedem your bitcoin with it on chain, no?
Recently I synced a full indexed node on a VPS in under 24h and downloaded it to my slow hdd, runs well on a rpi 3. Total cost 2$, less than 2 days syn + dl. Maybe I try to make a project which could automate this.
Yeah, you also get inbound liquidity in the same amount. I'm not sure about other wallets (that actually open a channel), but inbound liquidity is one of the most important aspects of using LN. In general, you pay more (than Phoenix fee) for services that provide inbound liquidity, so that should be considered as a feature, not an issue.
It was about time for someone to call out the harsh truth of businesses accepting bitcoin - its next to nothing. Tesla accepting it feels like lifetime ago.
Another note is LN wallets. I would like to take this opportunity to ask, why isn't Phoenix the go to wallet? Why does the community shill other wallets when Phoenix is a clear winner when it comes to non-custodial easy-to-onboard wallet?
Is it LND or btcd? I guess most common LND setup uses btcd instead of bitcoin core, and thats why everyone just says LND down... Reminder that bitcoin core is Bitcoin, everything else isn't. Use bitcoin core, it's the best, safest and the only tool for running bitcoin.
Well, if you do the same for 2010 vs 2016, you will see that difference is far greater. Not to mention that this RX6600 unobtainable at 270$. It's not end of growth tho, it's GPU makers ruthlessly exploiting the GPU demand and chip shortage.
Well no, it seems they are making a difference between an application (Tornado cash) and base layer (ethereum). They banned github repo, why not ban ethereum which also publicly holds the contract? A case could be made that if a tornado cash developer enabled criminal activity (or whatever the charge is), every ethereum developer also did it. Vitalik too, why not arrest him?
Instead, this is the government formally embracing ethereum base layer, and saying "we call the shots here, we decide what runs on it or what doesn't ".
They are actually policing the blockchain, which means they own it.
Mark my words, ethereum will soon be our biggest enemy.