Leave the engineering to the engineers.
Discussion
OP_RETURN is based.
We still need more ways to post to nostr via OP_RETURN. Like, a doggie coin copy of the nostr:npub1049yaplj3c8rtqw542frf9xlkka59z4a4ssdk72kpc4aajznhw5q8ra7md at least.
We could repurposed resources of your bot
Not mine but I do think that would be a good idea
how many transactions can't be processed because nostr:nprofile1qy88wumn8ghj7mn0wvhxcmmv9uq3jamnwvaz7tmswfjk66t4d5h8qunfd4skctnwv46z7qpqwamvxt2tr50ghu4fdw47ksadnt0p277nv0vfhplmv0n0z3243zyqxuh5sg is spamming the block chain.. smh
Totally worth it. Need to get get of Taproot also.
GFY bad actor, your manipulations are disgusting.
Also Core are compromised.
No fork and fuck Core V30 malware.
Politics/policy is not engineering obviously
OP_Return is used for the witness committment? Not to my understanding. Can someone explain/expand?
npub1lw78wl9c4fryld489hvune6hgykx92alvnjzzrddxkycxk6ew5jsvramt7
Can you expand? Witness committment ? For L2? Dont see this from Greg's blog.
Hahahahahahaha he used FakeGPT instead of ChatGPT to prompt for an answer
Hahahahahahaha he used FakeGPT instead of ChatGPT to prompt for an answer
Hahahahahahaha he used FakeGPT instead of ChatGPT to prompt for an answer
Can you explain how op_return is used for thw witness committment?
npub1lw78wl9c4fryld489hvune6hgykx92alvnjzzrddxkycxk6ew5jsvramt7
It's part of Segwit, and a bit complex
Segwit blocks can be more than 1MB, but the pre-segwit nodes (they still work) look at just the first 1MB and therefore the blockhash is the hash of just the first 1MB
Therefore, in order to have some hashing of the entire Segwit block, necessary to make sure we all agree on what is in the entire block, the hash of the remainder of the block has to be snuck into the first 1MB.
The way they chose to do this was by putting it into an OP_RETURN in the coinbase transaction. i.e. that has the hash of all the witness data of that block
Hello kettle, this is pot……
As a fellow engineer, is this how you operate as a CTO? You cannot accept that your well founded engineering decision may be wrong?
Just curious, is there any dissenting opinion around you, or is it silenced, or simply ignored?
You're viewing a prime example of how engineering discussions work.
Someone makes a proposal, which then gets peer reviewed in an attempt to poke holes in it.
So your dismissive additude of others opinions is just a byproduct of your personality and not a reaction to the merit of the argument.
It requires a fair amount of ignorance to think functionality can be removed from Bitcoin without consequence. You wouldn't see such a suggestion coming from a protocol developer.
The immediate increase in attack surface for no meaningful reason is very, very reckless.
He gets lots of dissenting feedback on nostr at least. The majority seems to be dissent. I think he has a sadism streak to be honest. The glee and the taunting is excruciatingly unserious.
Oh, it's quite serious.
I seriously enjoy being proven correct regarding controversial opinions.
Humility.... he's heard of it 🤣
I heard a guy saying you should stay humble and stack sats, but I stopped stacking sats long ago.
You still in touch w/th@ tagRkid - false alarms? nostr:npub17u5dneh8qjp43ecfxr6u5e9sjamsmxyuekrg2nlxrrk6nj9rsyrqywt4tp /just wondered how th@is now/only if you care 2 share here. t Y*
So you got yours. Got it.
At least this is starting to make sense.
No need to be humble anymore
Context: there are obviously ways to ban it that don’t freeze 60% of Bitcoin. Pierre knows this. But some people just can’t resist the opportunity to dunk on the ‘other side’.
Obviously
Well, all great products has been built together with designers, researchers, product and domain experts. Engineers always geek out on their own
This sounds a lot like “leave the money matters to the money experts”.