pull down to refresh
5082 sats \ 0 replies \ @itsTomekK 27 Jan \ on: Meme Monday - Best Bitcoin Meme Gets 5,000 CCs memes
Hello,
- For sending:
Trampoline routing delegates route calculation to the ACINQ node, which is how it learns the amount and destination of BOLT 11 payments.
With BOLT 12 and the support of blinded routes, ACINQ doesn't learn the destination node anymore. However, only a handful of wallets support BOLT 12 at the moment.
For backwards-compatibility, we need to keep allowing paying wallets with BOLT 11 invoices, which is why we left the privacy notice as-is. Once the whole ecosystem migrates to BOLT 12, then this privacy issue will be fixed for good.
- For receiving:
ACINQ doesn't know the origin node. It knows the destination Phoenix node and the amount.
- In the case of Phoenix->Phoenix payments, ACINQ will always know the origin and destination node, and the amount, even with BOLT 12.
Finally, note that a Lightning node id is much less persistent than an on-chain address, except for routing Lightning nodes with publicly announced channels.
I have been reading up on this. I think there are certain things you should be aware of. This is from robosats docs:
Amazon eGift CardsPermalink Amazon eGift Cards are one of the more private payment methods on RoboSats. They tend to be quick and convenient, but funds must be spent on Amazon.
It is important to not share a giftcard code directly on the chat, as this might lead to difficult to solve disputes in case of fraud. As a seller, do not accept a giftcard code on the chat. Instead, the seller should provide an email in chat. The buyer should buy a new giftcard explicitly for the trade and have it sent to the email address of the seller. This way the seller knows he is the only one to have access to the redemeable code. This apprach also generates verifiable evidence that the giftcard was bought for the RoboSats trade in case of dispute
This is from the bisq site:
Disambiguation Amazon eGift cards are bought on the Amazon website using your account, and sent electronically to the recipient, not the paper vouchers that contain a visible code, and that you can buy at shops for cash. We understand the latter are more private because there is no name attached to the payment, but they also come with risks, namely:
no payment proof: the seller can claim the code was already spent on receipt, and neither the buyer nor the mediator have any means to ascertain either way illicit origin: code vouchers could be obtained through scams, and the recipient account could get the balance erased as a result, and his Amazon account banned For these reasons, Bisq only allows for eGift cards.
An enemy decoy airfield, built in occupied Holland, let to a tale that has been told and retold every since by veteran Allied pilots. The German “airfield,” was constructed with meticulous care, made almost entirely of wood. There were wooden hangers, oil tanks, gun emplacements, trucks, and aircraft.
The Germans took so long in building their wooden decoy that Allied photo experts had more than enough time to observe and report it. The day finally came when the decoy was finished, down to the last wooden plank. And early the following morning a lone RAF plane crossed the Channel, came in low, circled the field once, and dropped a large wooden bomb.
(This could be a myth though, but if not, then a top trolling)
Sometimes cloud providers will compress and/or delete metadata from your files a little too liberally...
You should talk to Proton support and explain that the file size is different than advertised once you download it. Maybe they can fix the issue or give you direct download link.
P.S. its important to verify your backups before you NEED too. Good luck!
i have a core lightning node i dont connect to anything to that i can test send to my SN ln address, then i do all the funny business with my lnd node ( connecting for sending / receiving in sites like SN or nostr)
Bitcoin's game theory accounts for this.
SBR or no, the USG could simply start subsidizing mining if they wanted to gain control of hashrate.
Imagine if there was a pool secretly subsidized by the USG that gave better payouts than other pools.
Seems likely that it could attract more hash than others because it didn't have to compete based on real-world profits. USG can print money and give it to their pool or can threaten violence to its citizens to demand their money (tax them) and subsidize the pool that way. Both things that non government pools can't do.
Govt subsidy of mining is a known threat to miner decentralization.
So, it seems to me that the threat described in the article is not new, just a different mechanism for achieving it.
The defense in both cases is which coin users want.
If there is a USG fork of Bitcoin and most users desire the USG coin over bitcoin, it's hard to see how miners stick with the bitcoin network.
However, if the USG fork does not offer the same value prop (censorship resistant, fixed supply money) it's hard to imagine no one wanting real bitcoin anymore.
If the USG coin isn't a fork but rather just a sustained 51% attack, it seems like the censorship argument comes back into play (ie. with enough censorship the fees for censored transactions rise high enough that hash rate leaves USG pool).
It does feel like it ultimately comes down to a race between how fast the USD devalues through money printing to subsidize mining and how fast the value of censorship resistant bitcoin increases.
In my opinion they dilute the use of PoW on the platform. I should be able to withdraw all the 'sats' I receive... and have those 'sats' be as valuable and universal as those I earn with my little Futurebit-Apollo-turned-Winter-heater.
Sats are derived from Proof-of-Work (which is the point of the article)... and Cowboy Credits are still a bit of a mystery to me honestly. When someone 'sends' sats and the sats cannot be received (for some reason) then the receiver gets cowboy credits instead. So SN has the 'original' sats that were sent... AND creates Cowboy Credits out of thin air for the receiver to get?
Except the receiver cannot withdraw them or use them otherwise they are for 'Stacker News' only? I believe I understand that correctly?
I understand the 'purpose' of Cowboy Credits (not be called a money transmitter) but in the process SN receives real sats and creates Cowboy Credits in the process and this isn't a great long-term solution.
I often think about how discrete SN is.
It's only going to take one stacker, who's really tapped into the goings on, to bring those to us. I'm sure someone will step up before too long.
@Coinsreporter has made a few attempts at daily curated news posts. Something like that seems promising: Bitcoin News You May Have Missed (por ejempo).
Okay, read this, so here's a slightly better take: the article is brilliant and thoughtful and probing, as per usual.
And highly relevant to btc. It's worth asking why basically zero economists from the total population, and a negligible number from the populations you would most strongly suspect of "getting it" (e.g., the ones affiliated w/ mises.org) actually get bitcoin. The priesthood explanation offers a blanket explanation, but is there another one?
I agree w/ SA that priesthoods are generally good. Having been deep in the "alternate health" world I can confirm that it is mostly idiocy, and the arguments are mostly terrible, and the data confirms this when you dig into it with any sophistication. But also these views make surface-level sense, and in fact they can often be surface-level correct -- the issue is that real life is not at the surface level. You start adding in all of the special cases and weird circumstances and complexities of how people inhabit their environments and pretty soon your elegant populist theory is a jumbled mess.
So I worry constantly whether I am being really really dumb wrt btc. But I also have done the work and slogged through the mud and shit, so at least I know, in grotesque detail, why I think it's a Big Deal. I know why I believe what I believe at a deep level. But I still worry that no priesthood, even a rogue faction, champions it. Almost nobody's talking about it the right way.
As Feynman said, the first principle is that you must not fool yourself and you are the easiest person to fool. Which is concerning.
Anyway, thanks for posting the article, very worth reading and sitting with.
I don't really see it. There's already a USG-sanctioned "chain" and that's the traditional financial system. Why would a USG controlled fork of Bitcoin fare better than fiat, with all its current advantages in ease-of-use?
I'm not saying some people won't stay with the USG fork. And I'm not saying the fork will die in one night. But in the long run, I don't really see what a USG-controlled fork offers as a value proposition and I'm not sure it'd be sustainable.
Long story short, Bitcoin is a dumb way to do things unless you care about decentralization. If it becomes centralized, then what's even the point.
- Will try to investigate from where is coming and why they send it to me
- If it was a mistake, I will return it back, but they will have to provide me proof that was a mistake and they are real owners of the tx
I've actually put a lot of thought into this comment. When I was much younger, I had a deep need to "fit in" which also manifested itself in constant lies. My parents moved us around a lot, so every new school was a chance to be a new me, and "this time people will like me for sure."
Thankfully it's a habit I grew out of but I never really considered it from the perspective of time lost. I think the most damaging lies, however, is the ones I told myself to justify not doing the things that I wanted to do.
"I don't have time" is probably most damaging lie I told myself, and I did it constantly. Looking back, there was a lot of lost time due to lies for sure.
I personally didn't mind Rsync. While it is "lazy posting" because it's not adding anything to the conversation besides a link, it is still providing a service.
If you have any ideas as to what type of Rsyncesque type of content you want posted, I'd be happy to contribute, but personally I thought the bot did a pretty decent job.
Wouldn't this only matter if the USG begins acting as an economic node?
If they're just holding a ton of bitcoin, that doesn't really do anything, if I'm understanding what @Scoresby's written on the topic.