reply on: r/bitcoin mods have completely lost their mind \ stacker news ~bitcoin

pull down to refresh

0 sats \ 10 replies \ @BITC0IN 10 Dec 2022 \ parent \ on: r/bitcoin mods have completely lost their mind bitcoin

sigh

I'm going to stop trading quote minutia with you for a second and outline my chief concerns first before reengaging quote for quote.

The first is your support for and thereby implied endorsement of shitcoins. No, a Bitcoin only firmware version does no absolve you of this. I see no way back from this ideological and security compromise, unless you do like what coinbase wallet (horrible, I know) has done and start removing support for shitcoins. Ideally all of them.

Second is the companion app you recommend your users to use alongside your hardware by default disempowers them from running their own node. The convenience you are providing them does not help them to become sovereign bitcoiners, but reliant upon your node and software wallet. This is both a security and privacy concern on several levels, and you know it.

Defaults that disempower end users matter. Supporting shitcoins matters.

In which way is an open source hardware wallet inferior (to what even lmao)? Where did we ever mislead our users and where did they have to trust us?

Quite the opposite actually for your all time favorite hardware wallet coldcard,

"coldcard"

You answered your own question, don't play dumb.

which you are keen to shill in almost every one of your posts, and that you absolutely have to trust that it's not leaking your seed: https://medium.com/blockstream/anti-exfil-stopping-key-exfiltration-589f02facc2e

only way to really avoid this concern is a multsig setup from multiple vendors and/or glacier protocol. Blockstream may have identified a concern, but the solution they provide is just another vulnerability that has the added convoluted logic of being self referential in its solution. It does not solve the compromised hardware problem. Seedsigner might even do a better job at this now that I think about it.

Happy to hear your rebuttal of the claims in that blog post! If you had any, you'd post them.

There is a lot to cover in all that, many fallacies are made and information intentionally left out as to cover your own USB products ass. I'm sure someone will put in the work to point out the specifics eventually. there's a lot in there to pull a part. Won't be doing it here and now as it's a tangent. Which, by the way, you love for people to go down. Seems to be the main use of that article by you guys, to distract people from the discussion being had to play on your bullshit court. Not going to do that now, or here.

There needs to be a default option, since you can't expect every bitcoin user to run their own node. If you think they will, you are being delusional.

If you don't run a node, are you even a Bitcoin user? at this point running a node is the baseline iq test to see if you can handle owning Bitcoin. Id you can't or won't, don't buy it. It dead easy running Bitcoin core. It's a one click install, select prune node button if you want to save space. Wait for sync. done. People making it seem like running a node is Everest are doing real harm.

Everything on the BitBox02 is FOSS. You can build the BitBoxApp from source. Just as you can build the firmware and the bootloader from source. I think you might be mixing up something here.

It's on the google play store. Again, defaults matter.

Users can setup their BitBox02 with whatever they like. They can use Sparrow, Electrum or whatever to set it up. We're writing blog posts on how to use these tools, but there needs to be a default option that is simple to use for beginners.

What they can do and what they are conditioned and stream lined into doing by your UX defaults is a world of difference. blog posts that no one reads do not solve this problem. You have created a mouse trap that disempowers end users.

Look. You can shit on the BitBox02 all you want, i don't care, but you are barking at the wrong tree. If you think every new bitcoin user will build an airgapped laptop or assemble a seed signer, you are being naive.

They can always try a coldcard instead. Just as easy to use. But this isn't about new bitcoin users as it is about Bitcoin users and people who want to learn and become real Bitcoin users. Your product does not inspire that action. It robs them of it.

They will either go with a FOSS bitcoin-only wallet or they are going to buy a closed source ledger that will advertise the next shitcoin scam within their app.

Your product supports the exact same shitcoinery as ledger, so don't delude yourself into thinking you're a bitcoin-only wallet. Users should choose Bitcoin only options that are open source, there we can agree. Ideally airgapped, without usb's or wires.

I'm not going to tell you that an airgapped laptop or a seed signer is insecure, because they probably aren't. But they are either hard to use or cost more money than a hardware wallet. None of the thousands of ways to store Bitcoin is perfect, all have trade offs.

there we can also agree. tradeoffs. You seem to be concerned with everyone else's and none of yours. We'll be here to point them out for you.

27 sats \ 9 replies \ @joko OP 10 Dec 2022

Leaving beside your obvious gaslightning about usb being insecure, anti-exfil not being imporant (for some inexplicable reason), etc, I think I now understand what your problem is:

You are trying to gatekeep Bitcoin.

"Everyone who doesn't use Bitcoin like I do, shouldn't use Bitcoin."

Sorry to break it to you, but no, not everyone will need to run a node. And not everyone will self custody their Bitcoin in the future. What we are trying to do is give as many people as possible the chance to self custody their Bitcoin.

I think you should step out of your bubble for a moment and actually talk with beginners in the space. I've onboarded hundreds of people and I'm telling you: Even opening the commandline is too hard for many. Should these people not be allowed to participate in Bitcoin in a self custodial way?

It's a ridiculous claim that can only come from people who are incredibly self absorbed and isolated in their echochamber.

0 sats \ 8 replies \ @BITC0IN 10 Dec 2022

Still a shitcoin wallet.

0 sats \ 7 replies \ @joko OP 10 Dec 2022

Does coldcard support taproot adresses yet?

0 sats \ 6 replies \ @BITC0IN 10 Dec 2022

coldcard has it's own issues too. no one is exempt. Yours just happens to be an obvious offender.

0 sats \ 5 replies \ @joko OP 10 Dec 2022

Issues like selling fake wallets (aka card wallets), not being open source or not honoring bug bounties you mean?

Sure, if you'd just be honest about these. But I don't see you critizing any of those everytime someone brings up coldcard.

0 sats \ 4 replies \ @BITC0IN 10 Dec 2022

all potentially valid points.

But at least they don't promote shitcoins or enable users to buy it within a companion app.

You can't say the same.

0 sats \ 3 replies \ @joko OP 10 Dec 2022

Okay, so we're now at the point where your only beef with the BitBox02 is that it has a multi-edition. I'm happy to address that:

Be surprised, I see your point. I wish we didn't have to make one. Unfortunately it's simply the case that beginners won't buy a hardware wallet that only holds bitcoin. I've been there too, and that's why my first wallet was a ledger! Should we leave these people with a closed source shitcoin wallet?

We don't promote the use of shitcoins, we actually keep it quite to a minimum, only supporting the top ~5 coins on the multi. There's no in-app trading, no swaps, no liquidity mining, no yield farming no staking in the BitBoxApp.

One could make the argument that shitcoiners pay for the development of the bitcoin-only edition, as far less than 50% of our time is spent on the multi-edition.