That's irrelevant. The data was just being stuffed into much more harmful places before it was updated to return the data.

It's data that most bitcoiners find immoral and/or problematic. "Illegal" was just used because the filteroors and their secret authoritarian allies would like to neuter bitcoin in order to prevent more of it.

"It only becomes a sanctioned data storage method if it's broadly accepted as such" "I am not a lawyer, but my understanding is that there are some drafting a public letter covering this" "However, it is necessarily true"

I guess we'll have to see how the courts define: "broadly" and what exactly is being "sanctioned"

By not succumbing to the mob? Just don't run it. Or run it with the filter enabled.

Readwise Reader. Great for epubs and does TTS.

Official Coinbase Statement: "We kinda thought he just forgot about it. But don't worry, we know where to get some more."

Then why haven't they? Look at what @petertodd just stuck in the chain to see if (or prove) Mechanic is full of shit: https://x.com/peterktodd/status/1965485899808153618

Peter, dontchaknow you could have saved $40 with inscriptions and stuffed more data in?? ;) Oh, then the anti-malware couldn't see it. That's right. Not only would a CP peddler call more attention to themselves, they'd be paying 4x the cost and taking 4x as long to propagate that content.

But but but SoV! Never sell your bitcoin, man!

Whoa, heavy, dude.

Wait, gold??

So neutrino is just a protocol & client. The data stays on the bitcoin nodes the client connects to except for what is cached, so from the lightning node's perspective, it's the same amount of storage I believe, but you don't need to stand up a bitcoin node on the same machine. It's remote and it just needs a couple of config options to support neutrino clients. I'm not sure about the privacy preserving features that it has, but my guess is that it scans large sections of the node's chain when it needs to check on blocks related to a channel it's checking on. Not sure about long term concerns, but they can be mitigated by only putting what you're willing to lose, since the tech is fairly new.

Code is shipped with any device that contains processing units, so unless you can verify that the code only does what it's supposed to do, there's a basic level of trust that you have to accept. So then the question goes past just startOS. If they didn't have an OS and gave you a usb drive with all the linux packages that you could independently checksum, you'd still need to trust all the authors of the code that's gonna run on that machine, including firmware. So, you're right, they might as well include a copy of the blockchain, as long as you could reliably verify it. And people generally aren't going to be putting their life savings on these devices since they're hot wallets. An attacker isn't going to strike it rich before word gets out about the supply-chain attack.

Only Democrats can be socialists. Duh

I think for the same reason you can't just bittorrent the blockchain, even if you somehow trusted the source. You basically need to replay all transactions in order to rebuild the spendable state, so that you can verify future transactions. By randomly getting the blocks from different network peers, you're corroborating the integrity of what's being transferred. But there are proposed optimizations: https://bitcoinops.org/en/topics/assumeutxo/

Seems like you could just spot check your chain and UTXO set though.

"No explanation. No warning. No justification. Only a github email notification."

That's not blame. He is describing the problem. Why are you defensive about this? You seem to know something about this problem.

Is it me or does this thing have a huge NFT vibe?

Apple "accidentally" leaks details about iterations that come out every 1-2 years. 😱

"Wuddya think of that B2 bomber flying over your head? That was pretty fun, huh? You probably never thought you'd see one of those so up close and personal, amirite right Vladdy-boy?"

Getting there. I've asked for this before, but the font is way too small. Can you please focus on that before any other UX improvements?

Yup. https://x.com/zoomyzoomm/status/1956141182754677084

Just updated iOS version and didn't see it. I'll definitely close my account if they start charging people without their knowledge.

I don't think Swan's a bad company. They've just made some bad decisions choosing partners, afaik.