pull down to refresh
You seem not to know what user space is. The term is not applicable to Bitcoin.
Bitcoin with the BIP-110 security update is fine. Miniscript is minishit and its sellers should not blame others for defects in it.
FUD. "It is a bug to use op_if for that. You have more than 2 weeks. Start fixing it today." https://x.com/i/status/2021610190466920834
The same reasons.
Ava Chow (achow101) next.
"We stopped funding Gloria in March last year (2025)." - @schmidty Mike Schmidt
https://x.com/i/status/2018606696570957939
Great news! Let's get the security improvement BIP-110 activated.
https://bip110.org
- No surprise that @Scoresby advertises the shitcoin.
- Does it use big OP_RETURN like b'Core wanted?
Gloria Zhao was fired and serious bugs were swept under the rug. Another week at the Core circle jerk.
They didn't cry when Saylor rug-pulled in 1997-2000 so I expect them not to cry this time too: https://www.sec.gov/enforcement-litigation/litigation-releases/lr-16829
"(...) but the history of fiat currencies is full of breaches of that trust" - Satoshi Nakamoto.
Shitshow. "Targeted social engineering attack" to control her Twitter account as if she was famous enough to target it (and not her GitHub account in order to attempt serious supply chain attack with B'Core). I doubt it, drama queen.
I agree that the most important is the message not to be naive. Very good article, thanks.
The number is not hallucinated: "an order to forfeit $237,832,360.55" - https://www.justice.gov/usao-sdny/pr/founders-samourai-wallet-cryptocurrency-mixing-service-sentenced-five-and-four-years. Let us know if you know how they intend to collect it.
Could you explain the $237 million in BTC, please? Had it been in possession of Rodriguez & Hill and they gave it to US? Or the amount is yet to be collected (how)?
You don't know what you are writing about. Or you are intentionally trolling.
I can't imagine a spammer not being malicious. They shouldn't mine bulky spam, e.g. 100kB (or more) garbage in OP_RETURN. Bitcoin is money. BIP-110 makes it more secure.
It's ridiculous to apply double standards: promoting malicious miners choice (and free-riding) while disregarding choice of honest ones and nodes.
I base the low probability of chainsplit on the fact that malicious miners are greedy and so have strong incentive to follow the Bitcoin network with the BIP-110 security improvement rather than hardforking their own, short-lived chain to mine bulky spam.
There could coexist 2 chains with 40% (A) and 60% (B) of the pre-split hashrate. Neither of the chains would probably sacrifice their hashrate to attack each other (reorg).
Anyway, chain split probability is low. Most probably malicious miners won't attempt a hardfork in the wake of the activation of the BIP-110.
I don't understand your question. The wall of text looks like propaganda of miners/mining pools lobby. As a matter of fact, hashrate is not everything (especially temporary one). Honest nodes play important role too.
While I agree that most people use wallets to produce addresses, I am sure that those wallets don't include mInIsCrIpT (e.g. Trezor) or disallow misuse (if there is anybody even trying to use mInIsCrIpT).