I was afraid of that--thanks for clarifying 😞

I'm with Matt Corallo on the "centralization is very concerning" issue but the nuclear option isn't going to fix anything at all neither.

Has anybody tried to shed light on to why pools are centralized? I read claims about pay-per-share needing a deep balance sheet and stuff but I've been theorizing about this since ten years now that an attacker wouldn't need to buy and operate 51% of all mining equipment. They only need to run a pool that pays out more than the competition. How expensive is that? Let the pool operate at a loss and you kill all competing pools.

I think this is how nation state adoption of Bitcoin mining looks like. You don't need to build huge mining farms to control the hash rate. You only need to recruit big mining farms to mine what you want to get mined.

Are you running an LSP?

So (forgive my ignorance) is this issue charging sats while running an LSP? Or is it something else? (i.e. could you run altruistically without charging any fees and be adhering to the law?)

Tor latency is not ideal for order routing.

Is it feasible to run LSPs on TOR anonymously?

I’d be happy to contribute to and use my public platform to bring attention to legal defense funds for people who build open source privacy tools, or for legal attempts to push back on unconstitutional government financial surveillance.

I just need to know that they are credible from people I trust.

40% on one pool and 70% across two where miners don’t have any real third option if they want reasonable stable payouts I’d definitely call “completely” :).

Still my broader point stands I think, I don’t buy the “oscillation” argument unless something actually pushes back, which I just don’t see happening? I’m sitting here screaming and everyone’s just shrugging…

They said the exact same thing about Bitcoin, that it's just an imaginary currency and doesn't exist in reality. It's a way of discrediting it.

I'm not defending ordinals, I don't use it, just trying to look at the argument.

'Rare sats' don't exist in Bitcoin.

They exist in 'ord', a separate protocol.

Affinity scammers want you to believe these are the same thing.

That's the spirit! Embrace the thrill of living on the edge and taking risks with web apps. Who needs downloadable apks when you're a rebel at heart? Keep pushing boundaries and breaking the rules! #rebelifestyle 🤘🏼🔥

Same! Can’t believe I sat on it. Especially when I talked to Ben about it before it was even launched and I was super stoked about it! I guess everything in my setup was just working and I didn’t have the kick in the ass to “fix” a problem that wasn’t really front of mind.

Phoenix backing out of the US certainly made it front of mind.

They will probably have to ban US IP's or do some other filtering to not have US customers.

Think back to what happened with BitMEX when they got in trouble for serving US customers on VPN...

Of course, not happy about this state of affairs but that's what it looks like for now.

Self-custody is a hill to die on.

But so is self-hosting.

Intermediaries: you will deputized, or you will be destroyed. Maybe not today, but they're coming for you.

Sad to see this. Perhaps this is the 'balkanisation' of bitcoin and lightning offerings for US vs non-USA customers.

It looks like the USG won't be comfortable with non-KYC LN apps for US users. But let's see how it pans out and if other apps follow suit.

Dude this is sick! The experiences of zaps are slowly spreading out and bridging from platform to platform. Going to be crazy when this is all seamless like any other web experience. 🔥👏🏻 nostr:note1cfpnxespyker7f6v3mrua5pn6fn7neuryktff5pcmjxvmy8gj5usuxmqsz

regarding #grapheneOS

Starting to wonder why not just two profiles: primary/main for all the important stuff and "public" or "exposed" or "google" for all the stupid apps that require google services...why not? Any good reason? Wife isn't super tech-savvy so trying to make the transition from her iPhone as painless as possible.