100 sats \ 0 replies \ @CruncherDefi OP 23h \ parent \ on: Beware of possibly new type of chain analytics for correlating pkeys to IPs bitcoin
IP address to all peers.
Yeah, unless you wait for 2 weeks (or whatever the default eviction mempool policy is) after which the transaction rebroadcasting links it to your IP. I repeat again. Bitcoin core treats those transaction as your own when your pubkey is the receipient. And will not stop trying to rebroadcast them.
Sorry, I have a policy that I don't engage in reply chains for more than 3 replies. Hope that replies so far were helpful.
Never said it is different. Rebroadcasting means repeated broadcasting.
And the "repeating tx broadcasting forever (because of low feerate)" part is privacy compromising. Hope that helps clear things up. For more info just google "bitcoin rebroadcasting".
Please read my post carefully with understanding.
The p2p nature of transactions broadcasting
I am talking about rebroadcasting. And rebroadcasting logic behaves differently for cases:
- you are the owner of public key (even if only on receiving site)
- you are not the owner of public key
And any externally visible difference for those two cases can be leveraged to deanonymize users.
reasonable to say that the node that you see as the broadcaster to you of the transaction is not the creator of the transaction.
And that's why I pointed out the 'repeatable rebroadcast' part. Single measurements obviously won't reveal the owner. But repeated measurements over time will do it faster than you would expect.
Distributed, permisionless git hosting is something we totally need at some point in order to implement cypherpunk vision. Glad there is some development there.
🤡
Seriously. Get real. This "I don't believe in government" cosplay is not how we win.
Physical power doesn't care about laws, words, believes or signed pieces of paper. Those are abstract things. Physical power projection exists objectively in physical reality.
The only way to fight back and win is to become power projectors ourselves.
What would you credit-assign the fees to RUNES protocol?
Dude. It's halving. Historic moment. People will bid for blockspace just for making the history.
No RUNES needed. And all fee-bidding-war-transactions that did not make it into 840000 block don't disappear from mempool so they spill over to further blocks.
Just wait till all the txs from 840000-fee-bidding-war clear and then we can conclusively talk about RUNES impact on fees.
RUNES-guys made en excellent choice to pick up 840000 block for starting out. They get free coverage from people assigning high fees to them. I didn't even know about that protocol before halving.
No conspiracy theory needed. There was a fee bidding war for getting into the 840000 block. All txs that didn't make into the 840000 block due to block-size limit didn't just disappear from mempool. So they spill over to further blocks.
TIP: In iPhone you can discretely block biometric login by simultaneously pressing volume & lock buttons. You can easily do that even in the pocket or while taking the phone out.
I agree.
Money that competes for blockspace is mostly denominated in fiat:
- Miner costs are denominated in fiat
- Opportunity cost of using bitcoin is denominated in fiat.
Opportunity cost of using bitcoin is a function of bitcoin competition with meatspace entities.
For example:
- If it costs me 1$ to send 10000$ of remittance with bitcoin I will use bitcoin.
- If it costs me 1000$ to send 10000$ of remittance with bitcoin I will use western union.
If most economic decisions of "should I used bitcoin or $SOME_MEATSPACE_COMPETING_PRODUCT" are denominated in fiat, the competition for blockspace will be a function of fiat-denominated value (and not bitcoin-denominated value).
There are cases in which bitcoin have no meatspace competition (like censorship-resistant money) and those cases might cause a decoupling. But arguably most competition for blockspace at the moment are driven by competition-with-meatspace-entities.
The hypothesis is that txs fees size scale with fiat-value of bitcoin. And it makes sense.
Money that competes for blockspace is mostly denominated in fiat.
Miner costs are denominated with fiat. Opportunity cost of using bitcoin is also denominated in fiat. Meaning
Think about it. Bitcoin network competes with meatspace entities:
- If it costs me 1$ to send 10000$ of remittance with bitcoin I will use bitcoin.
- If it costs me 1000$ to send 10000$ of remittance with bitcoin I will use western union.
If most economic decisions of "should I used bitcoin or $SOME_MEATSPACE_PRODUCT" are denominated in fiat, the competition for blockspace will be a function of fiat-denominated value (and not bitcoin-denominated value).
There are cases in which bitcoin have no meatspace competition (like censorship-resistant money) and those cases might cause a decoupling. But arguably most competition for blockspace at the moment are driven by competition-with-meatspace-entities.
I will expand on my reply.
Imagine we have some crazy sci-fi 3d scanners/printers that can clone atom-by-atom an object.
If you could clone a hardware wallet 1000 times you could brute-force all pins easy peasy.
Once we established that futuristic crazy sci-fi technology breaks pin-based HW the question is how far away we are from that future costwise/technologywise. And it's something we also need to consider if we want to put HW in a cold-storage for 50 years.
Evil maid finds your Coldcard, you're fine, unless she also knows your pin
Or unless she is extremely sophisticated attacker with expensive and bleeding edge forensic equipment.
All hardware wallets are in the end security-by-obscurity solutions. I'll admit that level of obscuration is very high, but it's still security-by-obscurity.
Seed Signer is signer-only device. Decoupling signing and key storage is different paradigm. Having different options is good, so shitting on Seed Signer is at best a not responsible thing to do.
You don't get to unsubscribe from power projection games.
Obviously pieces of paper cannot make claims to your property. That would be ridiculous. But physical power projectors (that might respect those pieces of paper) can make unnegotiable power projection claims to your property (like your physical body) whether you like it or not.
Look, I like what your doing here. But I believe that this "I don't believe in goverments, I am not governed" cosplay is harmful, because it is not how we win the world as bitcoiners.
Power projection game exists whether we like it or not. And biggest players in power projection game are states whether we like it or not. So in order to win bitcoinerers must in some form assimilate/integrate/defeat those state players and become the top power projectors. And 'goverments don't exist' cosplay alone won't achieve that.
About the wild-west analogy.
If someone steal your coins you are done, but what if you'd have indestructible tank to carry your coins around?
Encryption is kinda like that. Your coins aren't just lying and waiting to be taken. They are surrounded by cryptographic vault that's impenetrable. While perhaps still not ideal, it somewhat changes the situation.
and besides, everyone will become a nominal "billionaire" in the next couple of decades.
Yeah, this is really efficient and evil trick of FIAT-world politicians. Basically you can push different policy disguised as something else if you are patient. And I see it everywhere.
Examples:
- We are going to give all families (or some other groups I target) 1000$ every month forever!
Its not forever, inflation relatively quickly will make it effectively 0. So they don't need to worry about long-term costs of such "forever" handout laws.
- We only want to monitor relatively large cash transaction of over 1000 Euro.
"Over 1000 Euro" will eventually contain all everyday transactions if we wait long enough for inflation to catch up. So you effectively push "Monitor all cash transactions" law if you are patient.
- Is "The Non-Aggression Principle" an odd name for something that considers a child stealing a pack of gum "aggression", but two MMA fighters nearly killing each other not "aggression"?
Why would we discuss semantics of words? Lets leave it to linguistics researchers. It so weird that frequently people argue over semantics of words, instead of actually discussing underlying issues.
- Since libertarians are not collectivists, shouldn't we stop complaining about how "the media" or other collectives are "acting"?
Why would that be relevant? Those are independent things. If one is not a collectivists it doesn't stop other people from being collectivists.
- Similar to how a professional athlete doesn't despair for humanity's lack of athleticism, should libertarians go a little easier on people for not being at our level of understanding the depravities of the state?
Incorrect comparison.
- Other peoples lack of athleticism doesn't affect you. That's why processional athletes don't bothers.
- Other people political decisions do affect you. That's why people do bother about spreading their political views.
Think of the "phone number requirement" as "Proof of work". If you frame it that way it kinda makes sense. It takes time and effort (or cost) to obtain a phone number.
Obviously we at SN know what would make the better POW to fight off the spam, but the normie world is still not there.
As others said: do nothing.
Bitcoin is static supply asset. So as things get more efficiently produced, more automatized and cheaper to produce, you get to enjoy that with hard money such as bitcoin.
The 'searching for yield' is an old mindset induced by fiat world, in which you need yield to even stay equal.
I also dropped it.
In my case caffeine fucked up my sleep quality, even when drinking small amounts in the very morning.
Common knowledge is that coffeine half-life is around 6-8 hours, so you should be fine with your sleep quality when you drink it in the morning, right? Right?
Nope. What if I told you that caffeine metabolite paraxanthine stays up to 36 hours in your system. And it have similar stimulating effects as caffeine itself.