pull down to refresh
related posts
0 new comment

245 sats \ 4 replies \ @siggy47 10 Mar
Do you anticipate broadening your lightning payout methods towards something like what Braiins has?
reply
0 new comment
472 sats \ 2 replies \ @BitcoinMechanic OP 10 Mar
We don't want to cut corners like that. "Lightning addresses" require DNS which absolutely sucks frankly, BOLT12 is Lightning native and the correct way to do things.
reply
0 new comment
0 sats \ 0 replies \ @siggy47 10 Mar
Thanks for the info.
reply
0 new comment
0 sats \ 0 replies \ @Solomonsatoshi 10 Mar
deleted by author
36 sats \ 0 replies \ @Bell_curve 14 Jul
Braiins is underrated
I follow their CEO on X and Primal
reply
0 new comment
134 sats \ 1 reply \ @siggy47 10 Mar
Thanks for doing this! Do you keep any stats about growth of small home miners v. the big guys?
reply
0 new comment
46 sats \ 0 replies \ @BitcoinMechanic OP 10 Mar
We don't though I would be interested to know. Miners on OCEAN don't use accounts, and can split among as many addresses as they like so we don't have super reliable data to go off.
reply
0 new comment
10.1k sats \ 4 replies \ @kruw 10 Mar
Why is OCEAN merely pretending to censor data transactions by using mempool filters instead of actually censoring them by refusing to validate any blocks that contain data transactions? Rijndael made "Bitcoin Purifier" so your pool can start a "spam" free fork of Bitcoin: https://github.com/rot13maxi/bitcoin-purifier
reply
0 new comment
31 sats \ 2 replies \ @BitcoinMechanic OP 10 Mar
This question is deliberately deceptive/leading. If you're running a node you're "pretending to censor" as well. Happy to discuss what we're actually doing if you're interested in being genuine.
reply
0 new comment
0 sats \ 1 reply \ @kruw 11 Mar
I am interested in being genuine: If you actually wanted to stop "spam" on Bitcoin, why aren't you running Bitcoin Purifier?
reply
0 new comment
0 sats \ 0 replies \ @HuMhmadi 11 Mar freebie
من علاقمند وکنجکاو در همه ی زمینه
ها هستم ودوست ندارم چیزی یا کسی را متوقفف کنم
0 sats \ 0 replies \ @HuMhmadi 11 Mar freebie
Bitcoin is a great revolution in the field of currency that can save the world from unipolarity provided that a solid infrastructure is created for it in all countries.
44 sats \ 2 replies \ @028559d218 10 Mar
Do you think Foundry miners (sorry hashers) will eventually recognize the damage they are doing to Bitcoin? Will they eventually choose to leave once they see the damage they do to censorship resistance?
I saw this a few hours ago and it's the only thing concerning me about Bitcoin long term (foundry 7 blocks in a row)
Thank you
reply
0 new comment
110 sats \ 1 reply \ @BitcoinMechanic OP 10 Mar
No, I think if/when they leave it'll be because FPPS just becomes unsustainable for the pool. It's overkill as far as variance reduction goes to such an extreme degree that miners at some point get fed up paying for it. Sadly clown world economics persist and as a result money finds its way to places it shouldn't.
reply
0 new comment
0 sats \ 0 replies \ @028559d218 10 Mar
Thank you so much. Keep up the great work at Ocean... hopefully the Foundry people get with the program and diversify.
I've never heard of/read about a 7-block reorg, but it would cause final settlement to default to 7 blocks totally self-inflicted
reply
0 new comment
46 sats \ 1 reply \ @0xbitcoiner 10 Mar
In real-world scenarios, what are the implications of setting up a template (datum) that's not Ocean's?
reply
0 new comment
119 sats \ 0 replies \ @BitcoinMechanic OP 10 Mar
Miner-side template construction whilst still pooling rewards is the holy grail of practical approaches to decentralizing mining. Asking everyone to go lotto-mine is not realistic, and pools naturally centralize (due to how much better they work at scale - limiting Bitcoin to < 40 or so pools realistically).
So it's about designing a pool in such a way as it doesn't really have much influence over anything which is the goal of OCEAN. If we were to turn rogue it should have minimal impact on the network and everything we're doing works towards diminishing our role.
Can go into more detail if needed, your question seems like you just wanted me to keep it broad-stroke level so I'll stop there.
reply
0 new comment
17 sats \ 2 replies \ @siggy47 10 Mar
Is there a public Ocean lightning node for miners to connect to? I know liquidity would be on Ocean's side upon opening, but eventually it might make payouts more efficient?
reply
0 new comment
146 sats \ 1 reply \ @BitcoinMechanic OP 10 Mar
This isn't really a scalable approach. We ask that OCEAN miners who want to get paid out over Lightning figure out how to get decent liquidity and reliable payments from the network in general rather than directly connecting to us.
reply
0 new comment
17 sats \ 0 replies \ @siggy47 10 Mar
I had a feeling...
reply
0 new comment
3 sats \ 1 reply \ @benwehrman 10 Mar
How do you describe the importance of Ocean to a non-technical newbie who isn't proficient in the dynamics of the Bitcoin Mining market? Give me the elevator pitch
reply
0 new comment
115 sats \ 0 replies \ @BitcoinMechanic OP 10 Mar
Mining has a bunch of elements, hashing is just one of them.
Miners only hash these days which means the guys who choose what goes in/doesn't go in to Bitcoin's blockchain became a tiny centralized group. This means Bitcoin is censorship resistant to the extent we trust that group rather than PoW. This undermines everything and makes us look like every other "DINO" crypto.
reply
0 new comment
3 sats \ 2 replies \ @k00b 10 Mar
In your opinion, will we see a covenant enabling soft fork in the next few years? Would you personally signal for a covenant soft fork?
reply
0 new comment
1008 sats \ 1 reply \ @BitcoinMechanic OP 10 Mar
I don't think we'll see one, but I'm not against them - assuming no social contamination a la Wiztards/OPCAT and well-reasoned about.
Fundamentally I believe Bitcoin's use as a permissionless payment network (as opposed to gold 2.0) is hindered by capital gains tax and general disinterest, not lack of OP codes.
Obviously in theory one day that can change and it'd be good to have the primitives necessary for scaling that MoE use-case should it happen but not my first rodeo. The likelihood of sophisticated tech getting added to Bitcoin actually being used the way anyone predicts is almost zero, the scammer-to-bitcoiner ratio is way out of whack among proponents of these upgrades (meaning that's the use case that'll actually get fleshed out - NFTs and other scams rather than coinpools/ARK etc). There's non-zero risk of any upgrade/unintended consequences (learnt my lesson post Segwit).
tldr: if something like CTV can happen in a fairly non-contentious way then it's likely no more scary that CLTV/CSV. I would love Symmetry. But I'm basically not under any illusion that unlocking this stuff would change the way people use Bitcoin. Currently almost no one ever uses Bitcoin as a permissionless payment network compared to the millions using it as Gold 2.0 and it is currently trivial and cheap to do so.
The desire for this stuff just doesn't exist, and if it were to in the future there's a 99% chance that no one can handle the complexity involved and they just resort to centralized solutions - this is why I am not fussed if nothing progresses here.
Final point - adding new OP codes rugs devs attempting to build on what we have already. It takes years for the ecosystem to adapt after each change, that's a significant and not always obvious cost.
reply
0 new comment
0 sats \ 0 replies \ @pakovm 10 Mar
May I ask why do you believe that adding functionality rugs the devs not using said functionality?
I understand most of the reasoning in your comment (although I don't share it at all), but this part really doesn't make any sense to me, it's like saying that updating a library rugs the devs that were using the previous version of the library because they have been building something this far with functionality and optimizations they didn't have before, makes no sense IMO.
If anything the devs now have more tools and they could chose to use it or not use it.
reply
0 new comment
3 sats \ 2 replies \ @k00b 10 Mar
What's the most surprising thing you've learn building OCEAN?
reply
0 new comment
260 sats \ 1 reply \ @BitcoinMechanic OP 10 Mar
How captured mining is. Revenue simply isn't the motivator it's cracked up to be.
reply
0 new comment
10 sats \ 0 replies \ @Solomonsatoshi 10 Mar
Can you elaborate on this?!
reply
0 new comment
2 sats \ 3 replies \ @denlillaapan 10 Mar
Looking at mining over a slightly longer time frame, what's the most surprising change you've seen? (centralization, demand-response programs, geographic distribution, etc)
reply
0 new comment
28 sats \ 2 replies \ @BitcoinMechanic OP 10 Mar
How it still even works at all in its current state.
reply
0 new comment
0 sats \ 1 reply \ @denlillaapan 10 Mar
what do you mean "works"? the design, that it hasn't been coopted (more)?
reply
0 new comment
0 sats \ 0 replies \ @BitcoinMechanic OP 10 Mar
Centralized at the hardware and template level and overwhelmingly closed source.
reply
0 new comment
1 sat \ 4 replies \ @siggy47 10 Mar
Are LND payouts functional at this time?
reply
0 new comment
37 sats \ 3 replies \ @BitcoinMechanic OP 10 Mar
[edit]: apparently I don't know how to read: LND is not functional as they still don't support BOLT12.
Yes, requires CLN until the ecosystem (cough LND) finally starts using BOLT12.
(Phoenix would work but they don't support descriptions yet, but working on a workaround for that).
reply
0 new comment
0 sats \ 0 replies \ @aoeu 11 Mar
I think I read that Coinos is an option (if you are okay with temporarily keeping it custodial) since they support bolt12 as well.
reply
0 new comment
0 sats \ 1 reply \ @siggy47 10 Mar
Thanks for clearing this up. There was some discussion here re using Phoenix.
reply
0 new comment
36 sats \ 0 replies \ @BitcoinMechanic OP 10 Mar
Yeah we have an idea about how we can get around their hesitance to support BOLT12 descriptions.
reply
0 new comment
0 sats \ 1 reply \ @DiedOnTitan 11 Mar
What is your take on Bitmain's near monopoly on ASIC production given their history of deception (ASIC Boost)?
reply
0 new comment
0 sats \ 0 replies \ @BitcoinMechanic OP 12 Mar
Nothing unique, just praying one day the near monopoly ends.
reply
0 new comment
0 sats \ 0 replies \ @SatsMate 11 Mar
What are things you can do to decentralize Ocean mining at a broader scale?
reply
0 new comment
0 sats \ 2 replies \ @BitcoinIsTheFuture 11 Mar
Where do you see your biggest growth opportunities in decentralization?
reply
0 new comment
10 sats \ 1 reply \ @BitcoinMechanic OP 11 Mar
DATUM adoption.
reply
0 new comment
0 sats \ 0 replies \ @BitcoinIsTheFuture 11 Mar
Thanks I need to look into that more!
reply
0 new comment
0 sats \ 0 replies \ @unschooled 10 Mar
I've heard you say you only spend "money" once a month. Presumably this means you're using a credit card for daily spending and pay it off with bitcoin using certain exchange services.
Aside from your work at Ocean, how do you think about the network competing with the dollar and should bitcoiners be concerned with using it as a "currency" in this respect?
reply
0 new comment
0 sats \ 0 replies \ @ek 10 Mar
What do miners think about fusion power? Are they worried, do they think we won’t achieve it in any time frame that would be relevant right now or something entirely else?
reply
0 new comment
0 sats \ 1 reply \ @ek 10 Mar
How did you get into bitcoin mining?
reply
0 new comment
100 sats \ 0 replies \ @BitcoinMechanic OP 10 Mar
With a Macbook Pro CPU in 2011 lol.
reply
0 new comment
0 sats \ 2 replies \ @030e0dca83 10 Mar
What a steak doneness do you prefer?
reply
0 new comment
8 sats \ 1 reply \ @BitcoinMechanic OP 10 Mar
If ribeye - anything except rare and well done is great.
Technique is to always order "medium" in restaurants as if I get rare/well-done I can always complain. Medium rare is ideal but then when they make it rare I feel too British to complain about it.
reply
0 new comment
0 sats \ 0 replies \ @030e0dca83 10 Mar
Medium is the most delicious, yeah
I frequently ask this question to people who host AMA and most of them write about the same trick: if you order a steak you have to order rare and you'll get medium. If you do it yourself just make it medium
Thanks for your answer, have a good day
reply
0 new comment
0 sats \ 1 reply \ @k00b 10 Mar
What's something you believe about bitcoin mining that few bitcoin miners agree with you on?
reply
0 new comment
21 sats \ 0 replies \ @BitcoinMechanic OP 10 Mar
That using closed-source-everything isn't the least bit OK.
(Bitaxe miners agree with me but they make up probably <0.01% of the network hashrate.)
That StratumV2 fixes anything.
reply
0 new comment
0 sats \ 1 reply \ @benwehrman 10 Mar
I really enjoyed the "Bitcoin Roundtable" discussion you did with Guy Swann on his podcast a while back. I only listened to the first one though, from back in December IIRC.
Is that a regular thing? Or will it be? Would love more of those.
reply
0 new comment
0 sats \ 0 replies \ @BitcoinMechanic OP 10 Mar
It's monthly, we've done four(?) I think now.
reply
0 new comment
0 sats \ 1 reply \ @benwehrman 10 Mar
What's your favorite podcast appearance you've ever done?
reply
0 new comment
0 sats \ 0 replies \ @BitcoinMechanic OP 10 Mar
I think the third Satoshi Roundtable with Guy Swann.
reply
0 new comment
0 sats \ 1 reply \ @k00b 10 Mar
Who is the smartest person in bitcoin mining that you've ever met?
reply
0 new comment
0 sats \ 0 replies \ @BitcoinMechanic OP 10 Mar
Jason Hughes (wrote the DATUM protocol in a few months).
reply
0 new comment
0 sats \ 0 replies \ @MinnFinTech 11 Mar
deleted by author