pull down to refresh
0 sats \ 0 replies \ @nullcount 11h \ parent \ on: Are bitcoins meant for spending or savings? bitcoin_beginners
the same reason if satoshi or saylor sold his coins would be inflationary. total supply !== circulating supply
Demurrage is good for miners. Inflationary for non-miners. Overall, not necessary IMO.
Degens can already speculate on individual sats such that their perceived value of a sat exceeds one satoshi. Its a roundabout and "opt-in" way to "recover" extra value from the BTC tokens already in circulation.
Degeneracy on BTC is good/neutral for the degens. Bad for those who get scammed by degens. Not inflationary for non-degens who don't respect the recovered value.
Degens will degen whether demurrage exists or not.
Bitcoins are meant for BURNING.
Literally the last thing any UTXO can do: become unspendable via a provable burn.
Anything that happens with UTXOs/sats before provably burning them is just a temporary state transition on the path to becoming forever unspendable.
can confirm. Thought I was being clever/early by reserving the
null username for a no-kyc custodial account. Account disappeared one day (with my sats). Emailed the devs but they couldn't find any record of the account ever existing.Someone probably ran a
DELETE records where username is NULL and my acct got wiped. This is why its also important to log CHANGES to the database in a separate table or logging system. Or keep robust backups of the DB. That way if someone makes a mistake, you can at least investigate and resolve any missing data.the fact that Lezhi spent $7 million to publish [this message] for the world to see, gives his story at least some credence.
Nah, its just evidence that you'd have to be a victim of brain control to buy ETH
I like "vote with sats" machanic as a way to prioritize features. But there's a lot of trust involved with actually paying out the reward.
Why wouldn't I just wait for dozens of submissions and pick the best one?
Who decides whether the bounty is 100% complete?
What if multiple people complete the bounty? Who decides which person should receive the reward? Should you split the reward?
The kind of mercenary devs that seek bounties probably aren't going to convert to long term contributors of your projects.
LLMs can ingest your requirements and instantly give you a code submission for insanely cheap.
Robosats has a bounty program. Its all handled by github issues. They just have a markdown file that tracks all the active bounty issues in a table. You complete the issue, send an LN invoice and get paid if they want to pay you :)
Adding a loop and switch statement might be more readable/maintainable if you ever need to add more bits to check in the future.
However, if your only concern is raw performance, you're better off with just if-else statements.
Modern compilers do all sorts of witchcraft to automatically optimize your code. If-else chains can be optimized into efficient branch predictions. Some compilers will automatically flatten predictable if-else chains to minimize incorrect predictions.
You could further optimize your if-else example by avoiding deeply-nested if statements. This helps readability, and it helps the compiler make better branch predictions.
for example:
if (TypeMsgToSend_ui16 & MESSAGE_TEST_MESSAGE) {
TypeMsgToSend_ui16 &= MESSAGE_TEST_MESSAGE;
Encode_Command(RUT_COMMAND_TO_EXECUTE_SMS_SEND, PHONENUMBER, TEST_MESSAGE_TEXT);
}
if (TypeMsgToSend_ui16 & MESSAGE_RESET_CONFIRMATION) {
TypeMsgToSend_ui16 &= MESSAGE_RESET_CONFIRMATION;
Encode_Command(RUT_COMMAND_TO_EXECUTE_SMS_SEND, PHONENUMBER, RESET_CONFIRMATION_TEXT);
}
// Continue for other bits...
You can also specify hints for the complier that inform it's branch prediction optimizations: https://www.geeksforgeeks.org/branch-prediction-macros-in-gcc/
Sometimes, doing extra work (like pre-sorting an array) can lead to faster execution because the complier can make better predictions in some scenarios if it knows the array is sorted.
The only way to know for sure? Try many approaches and actually test how they perform at scale.
I have agreed with this for over 1-year
I'm surprised more economic nodes aren't updating their min-conf policy to account for the risks of transacting onchain while mining is relatively centralized.
I'm not convinced that anything can be "untraceable". Every action in the "real world" leaves a trace of some sort. Its just a matter of who can find the trace, and whether they can decode the trace such that it reveals something about the "real" action that occurred.
XMR relies on obfuscation of traces that everyone has access to.
LN relies on limiting access of transparent traces to only the nodes that route a txn.
Different approaches. Apples and Oranges.
Just because a protocol makes it easier to "act" with fewer and/or obfuscated traces than another protocol, does not necessarily prevent someone from using the protocol in a (wrong) way that creates MORE/TRANSPARENT traces.
FYI "Transaction size" usually refers to the number of bytes used to express the transaction.
I think you are talking about "transaction amounts".
I've also archived it here: https://nullcount.com/current-state-of-lightning-network-privacy-2021/
Maybe search engines will index it so others can find the information more easily.
Makes sense now. I call them "buy nothing days"
You'd be crazy to refuse a zap or burn sats. But I heard a story of one who did a hardcore "money fast" and burned a month's worth of expenses about $5k at the time after spending nothing the whole month. He probably made way more than that in the month passively with his businesses so it wasn't that hardcore lol.
I'm just trying to understand this term
Fiscal fast
Do you also forgo any revenues? Or just expenses?
How is it different from saving?
So fasting money is just saving?
I guess fasting food is just getting fatter then? Or stocking the pantry?
fiscal fast
In my opinion, its not a "money fast" if you still get to keep/spend the money you are saving now... its just savings.
In a money fast, you would still forgo spending, but at the end, you literally burn the money you just "saved". Not give it away, not save it for later, burn it!
Its like a "reset" with your relationship with food/money.
40 sats \ 0 replies \ @nullcount 2 Feb \ parent \ on: What’s the safest way to hold your btc? AskSN
LockTime in Electrum wallet is referring to the
nLockTime field of the transaction. The base protocol dictates that the transaction cannot be included in a block until nLockTime. So this sets a timelock on the TRANSACTION not on the UTXO. To set a timelock on a UTXO, you need use either CLTV (BIP65) or CSV (BIP112).I'm excited for MiniScript adoption as it can make it easier to create and share advanced timelock scripts.
Well, we don't have vaults onchain yet, so... I'm gonna go with Timelocks.
Any other scheme (multisig, etc) is essentially just a different approach to the key management problem.
Timelocks might be the only way to add security (i.e. some assurance that your holdings will not be spent in an unauthorized way) irrespective of how you manage they key(s).