pull down to refresh
safest bet
I needed a pointer from, I think it was conduition on a prior nym, to spot the consensus change Luke added in pre-110 knots. That alone made it a no-go. I'm pretty sure no one cares though, because for a majority it seems to be an emotional / spiritual choice, and for the ones that I have seen actively support it, they sound like they've all gone completely off the deep end.
So if nothing is rational, then I don't really see how any rational advice can help here? I personally wouldn't use btcd and especially not libbitcoin if it were my only node. If there's some feature of Core that you don't like, can always patch it out. What feature of Core do you not like? Maybe I'll patch it out for ya.
In this environment you have to wonder whether any hypothetical "eyes" are on any project.
You have to wonder what they catch. However, Bitcoin Core is generally perceived to be among the top non-corporate, non-hierarchical open source projects overall in terms of review. Many of the corporate projects too are inferior in terms of eyes.
Everything else is thus largely inferior in terms of eyes.
for a majority it seems to be an emotional / spiritual choice,
You nailed it. That's what matters right now. You are a talented coder /developer, unlike most of us, so you have the ability to get down into the weeds (I wonder how many guys like you are really out there?) For the rest of us, all we have is trust, which really sucks when you're talking about something that is supposed to be trustless. So, human actions matter. Hodlonaut articles matter. Ideological direction matters.
I wonder how many guys like you are really out there?
Of my age? Tens of thousands.
Of younger people that had the benefit of learning from the mistakes from guys my age without wasting years? Millions.
To be in power, you don’t need guns or money or even numbers. You just need the will to do what the other guy wouldn’t
- Verbal Kint
Then why the hell didn't anybody notice the coldcard bug? Have all these guys sold out and cashed in on shitcoin projects? Can we really expect better from guys who are basically operating as volunteers.
Because it was really, really hard to "spot" and no one cared enough to hack through the code. jamesob claims he spotted it though. I don't really believe him because he's cloutchaser and his evidence got deleted by Signal message expiry (lmao!!!) but on the off chance that he's being 100% honest, it was spotted.
So does that mean that AI is all we can trust? God help us!
Not at all. AI is just an analysis tool. It means that if you want to be your own bank, your choices are:
- Play money only, or
- Take it deeply serious and defend your stack like a bank would
"I cannot review this" is an option. It means you need to hedge in another way.
Good advice, and it would work for an obsessed lunatic like me. What about the normie who recognizes the problem with fiat and wants self sovereignty? We can't get them to attach a wallet to Stacker News.
Edit: coinos
Hi @siggy47! Thanks for your contributions over the years. 🙂
Disclaimer: I started as a dev focusing on Core a few years ago.
The Hodlonaut articles get some facts right, but the wokeism appears to have peaked around 2020.
Core v30's did a drastic change in default length OP_RETURN policy (not consensus) from ~80 to ~100 000 bytes. The reason the default value wasn't changed to 256 as a next step was to minimize the amount of repeated Luke & co shenanigans that would come from repeated increases.
I'm one of many who physically work alone. However, starting multiple physical offices to encourage collaboration and forward motion on hardening & improving Core is a good way for Bitcoiners to spend their sats on Bitcoin development. (Not the only way).
The trans thing appears to be incidental and pertains to 2 very long-term devs. They are not activists pushing an agenda on others.
Core is not perfect but don't let the shit-slinging get to you even if it appears to resonate.
It is healthy to be skeptical but please apply it to both sides.
In this environment you have to wonder whether any hypothetical "eyes" are on any project.
Which is ironic since spinning up claude code for $20 makes it cheaper than ever to get more eyes than ever and easier than ever.
Not on a Bitcoin project and with opencode instead, but yes.
It's incredibly easy. And cheap. And the amounts of bugs it finds and fixes is incredible.
Nothing. Give it 4 eyes instead of 2.
I mean: give your eyes to Bitcoin projects.
There must be a reason why, even though you're a user of Bitcoin software (I know for certain because my zap went through as sats and not CCs) you are not making sure that the software you use is safe, because you just said you didn't do it on a Bitcoin project. But you also said that it's cheap and incredibly easy.
So, if we are to find out what is causing the lack of eyes, why aren't you giving it eyes? It could be an indicator.
I have 4 wallets I review, including all their dependencies. I know what the cost is on Claude for reviewing all that properly, and then I don't even ask Claude to do the review, just prepare it. Those are the wallets I personally use. One of them I don't want to use because I know what's what, but I have to in order to zap you sats, or fall back to using worse software that I do not want to even look at anymore.
I guess it has always been the safest bet for the anti-core crowd.
In this environment you have to wonder whether any hypothetical "eyes" are on any project.