0x01 = 00001 0x0c = 01100 0x12 = 10010 0x1f = 11111 0x1c = 11100 0x19 = 11001 0x02 = 00010

00001 01100 10010 11111 11100 11001 00010

5bit byte to 8bit byte

00001011 = 0x0b 00100101 = 0x25 11111110 = 0xfe 01100101 = 0x65 00001101 = 0x0d 00000100 = 0x04

0b25fe650d04!

It’s base32, not base256

Yes

7 bytes (35 bits)

7 bytes * 8 bits = 56 bits

So, does that mean each byte is 5 bits?

No, because changing consensus has a cost, like rebuilding an engine. We simply decide to not to incur in that cost for past mistakes.

Bitcoin isn't a religion, we don't need to prove it's pure or perfect. We only need to keep it running.

Peak self-importance made me... emotional

I talked to a Physics PhD

😭

how i'm imagining our MVP of DMs will work

• unencrypted to start, and clearly labelled as such
• a DM is just an item (like posts and comments) under the hood
  • like a comment, a message is text field for SN flavored markdown
  • the first DM between sender-receiver is the root of a private SN thread between sender-receiver
  • receiver and sender can reply to each other indefinitely in this private thread
  • no one but sender and receiver can view the thread
    • future versions might allow inviting more stackers to it
    • future versions will be encrypted
  • why: we get to reuse ALL our existing code for threads, live comments, notifications, zaps, etc, and everyone is already familiar with the UI
• not much new UI except
  • a button to send someone a DM by visiting their profile
  • decoration to communicate the thread is private
  • settings for DM cost to >=1 sat (30% goes to rewards pool, 70% to the receiver)
    • when stackers receive DMs, the notification has different copy that maybe stands out a little more

I don't like the appeasement frame, since the implication is that the answer is in, that all reasonable people agree on what it is, and the remaining question is whether to throw a sop to the poor dipshits who haven't been enlightened.

Which maybe is how you feel about the matter, given the distinction you're drawing between the "quantum fud people" and "bitcoiners"? If so, I find that both uncharitable and inaccurate.

It's like he can't help himself.

"distancing myself was the best thing I ever did."

Hey @ek, I made a series of live streams in 2024 explaining how BOLT 11 is implemented in Core Lightning. I'm no longer working on LN, but I guess the implementation has not changed much, and neither has the protocol, at least for BOLT 11.

I think you may find part 4 interesting.

Today we are going to look at the transformation of the information of an invoice from its representation with bytes of 8 bits to bytes of 5 bits. Specifically, we'll try to understand why the description foo bar of an invoice is represented in a BOLT #11 string by vehk7grzv9eq.

I hope this helps.

https://lnroom.tonyaldon.com/2024-01-04-live-0020-core-lightning-implementation-of-bolt-11-invoices-part-4/

He lost 69k on the Predyx bet? How does the platform even allow a bet that big with such low liquidity? Shouldn’t it cap the bet at the available liquidity?

These past few months I've been busy traveling back to my country, and I haven't been working much on SN lately. I probably forgot about it. Also, previously, the weapon only appeared when you did Zap after a certain amount. Furthermore, you won't see empty or meaningless posts on my profile, waiting for someone to give me something. I only share my own experiences or information related to bitcoin that may be useful to other novice users like me.

You lost slightly less than 69k sats

Thanks @mega_dreamer for the boost! I’m looking forward to what Predyx does next!

Haters gonna hate. This is how we win.

First they ignore you Then they laugh at you Then they fight you Then you win!

I might be missing something, but who ends up with the extra liquidity he injected into the market that didn’t get used? Does it go to Predyx?

When he placed the bet there was 2,100 sats of liquidity, and he injected 69k. So best case scenario, he could only win those 2,100. Maybe more if someone else bet against him afterward.

Basically, he just added liquidity to the market, right? I didn’t see how the market looked at resolution, but I’m guessing there was still unused liquidity left. Does that excess go straight to Predyx?

No, he basically bid the price to 100% and then bought a ton of shares at 100% odds.

@mega_dreamer, setting a cap might be reasonable. I'm thinking about the level at which the possible return becomes negative because of fees.

Hmm, I see what your saying. And I've probably overplayed my "quantum is fud" stance. I don't dismiss it.

I should have done a better job of writing out what I wanted to say.

From reading a fair bit about quantum stuff, my understanding is that most bitcoin developers do take the problem seriously, and there is a lot of work being done to push forward solutions.

​By appeasement, I meant should we not ostracize the people like Carter, but rather put up with their breathless chicken little-ing?

As I said to Nic on X, if quantum resistance is the number one thing major capital allocators are concerned about, why don't they hire developers to write the code they want to see in the world? Where are the implementations on signet? Where are the projects he is VCing into existence?

He kept telling me that it was gatekeeping by the core devs, and I find that a ridiculous answer. If core devs really can achieve the level of gatekeeping he is saying, we should be working on that problem rather than qr.

This is an open network. At the very least, nic could back a new qr startup to solve this problem. Where is it?

I'm asking if we should appease people like nic and saylor not because quantum fud is completely made up, but because it may disarm what seems to me to be yet another way of attacking the distributed, decentralized, governance free thing that is Bitcoin.

I think it's very dependent on where you live (at least in the US).

From some leftist west coast cities, I've heard some real nightmare stories about people breaking into vacant homes, setting up camp, doing various things to "settle" themselves (maybe signing up for utilities, things like that), and then the homeowners are absolutely sunk, because the police and courts will not help them.

One more thing:

And I've probably overplayed my "quantum is fud" stance. I don't dismiss it.

Once upon a time, the idiom had it that "fud" was an unwarranted and illegitimate attempt to sow dissension by stoking fear, uncertainty, doubt. A kind of psy-op, engaged in by hostile actors.

Contemporary use seems to have flipped, to the extent that anybody pointing out weaknesses, downsides, danger is accused of FUDding. Like doubters of the glorious communist future once were, fud became the mark of people who lack sufficient conviction in the rightness of the cause.

It's funny that this would surface wrt Carter, who I remember making exactly this move around the time I first got into btc, where he was dismissing talk about the mining death spiral as fud, and ridiculing anybody who took it seriously. In my view, a person might think the MDS unlikely in practice, but it's a plausible outcome of the game theory of mining, and therefore a reasonable topic for people to discuss and think about mitigating.

Anyway. I personally would welcome more of what would today be considered fud, but that used to be considered the adversarial thinking the entire project is based on.