coldcard q saved me recently when I did a nostr fund payment to a bunch of people. the change amount looked off, and I realized I forgot to coinselect the nostr fund address.

hardware wallets are amazing tech, always check your addresses and amounts!

the church i'm in has tampons in the men's room ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

Anyone have any good beginner level bitcoin educational podcast and/or YouTube videos I can share with a friend? She has no financial hope and is in a lot of debt and I’m trying to get her orange pilled so she has some future financial hope!

#AskNostr #Help #Support #Hope #Beginner

You have signal or telegram?

Not a whole lot of bitcoiners that ride mountain bikes. We might have to link up!

The software fucked them in the end

Flight control system software on the plane you're flying on?

I dont think its a good idea to tell them that if someone shows interest in bitcoin or nostr, to onboard them.... But explain the tradeoffs with patients is

What do you want me to prove? Ever since debate about changing op return started and how it was handled on github, numbers of knots nodes went up. Why? Because people believe it's great to have a software version maintained by one guy who commits on main? For sure not. It's because people don't want to give core devs that kind of power. It's because it's not clear anymore in whose interests these changes to Bitcoin are being introduced for. It's because you will upgrade core at some point and will potentially introduce 2nd and 3rd level effects with these proposed changes. It's a choice. And starting from literally 0 to 10% node runners chose to not run core this time around.

Oh no, what you see here is actual bitcoin node runners voting with their feet.

It's crazy but, I no longer know which lightning wallet to recommend to my friends who want to receive and send zaps.

-Primal wallet? KYC, no thanks

-Coinos? Too many exploits, no thanks

-Walletofsatoshi or Blink? No NWC, no thanks

-Minibits or cashu.me ? NWC only with background app, no thanks

And they are all custodial wallets anyway, so thanks, but no thanks.

-Misty Breez would be nice should get under 100 sats and there is no tradeoff of using liquid for self custodial.

It seems that "Walletofsatoshi" is preparing a self custodial wallet that receives even a single sats... I look forward to it impatiently.

Get a real mag.

my beretta 1301 can handle the first 8 drones

its the 9th thats a problem

What does a "rich life" look like to you?

BREAKING: THE GUINNESS WORLD RECORD FOR MOST #BITCOIN PAYMENTS IN ONE DAY HAS BEEN BROKEN ⚡️

HISTORY 🚀

if you’re reading this you are an architect of bitcoin

I’m offering 1 million sats to a Bitcoin developer for 10 hours of focused code review on BitcoinKnots, specifically looking at commits by Luke Dashjr that don't already have public reviews posted on GitHub.

The scope:

Provide an independent review with a focus specifically on finding bugs that could adversely affect users.

Deliver a short write-up summarizing your findings.

If you’re interested, please reply below. I will choose a developer by tomorrow, 5 PM EDT.

This was posted on X not so long ago, the bounty was claimed by Marshall Long, OGBTC.

How do i point a miner to my node.

we need to replace github with an open alternative

nostr seems like an ideal fit

Yeah, but he still left.

No one man should have all that power.

Its why Satoshi left. You will never be like him.

Although miners construct the blocks and receive the payout, the nodes are (/should be) more powerful. The nodes are what verify transactions so if a large percentage of nodes point to a different OS (Bitcoin Knots) or even OS version, the nodes ultimately make the decision of what chain to follow.

The sensible policy is that relay should never be more restrictive than what is reliably getting mined in practice.

Anything more restrictive has the collateral harm of increasing centralization pressure by seriously hurting block propagation performance and by driving transactions to direct miner submission.

- gmaxwell

The last step doesn't follow the rules.

Change "DEAD" to "LIVE", changing only one letter at a time, with each step being a valid English word. I managed it in 10 steps but I'm sure you can do better.

how so?

USA is losing in every metric. In just three months, Trump managed to crash the Dollar, US Bonds and US stocks—all at once, while still claiming we're winning/getting rich. People's 401k is now 201k. Prices of everything are going up (but he will ignore all of that and only mention Eggs). The amount of mental gymnastics that his statist suporters (including Bitcoiners) are doing to go along with his insanity his laughable. #bitcoin will win.

I'm extremely impressed by the simping mindset. The last years have shown that powerful men can do and say whatever they want. As long as their simps feel aligned on a more abstract level, it literally doesn't matter how blatantly stupid or immoral they are.

True for politicians, CEOs, and bitcoiners. There will always be an endless supply of NPC apologists. The rationalizing mind is as flexible as a yoga guru.

I like that i can use any nostr client what i dont like is tgat people say use an extension to log in. Noooooo its easier to just use my nsec. Make it the way. I dont like tgat i need 3 different things to log in to a different client

Make just the nsec the norm

Good point. My counter is: not only might that make the documents signed fail to fulfil the intended function, e.g. convincing a govt agency that you have income, but more fundamentally, lawyers would know better than I that a signed statement that happens to have small print that says "lol, jk, maybe this isn't true" might not hold up in a court of law. I have a vague feeling there's precedent for that kind of thing.

Many years ago I had reason to mull over in great detail the question of "why don't banks and government institutions use digital signatures?" (there are many scenarios where this would make processes vastly more easy for users, for the banks themselves, while at the same time making processes more secure. And the common reason for explaining why digital signatures are not used "it's too complex to keep up with key management" only makes sense applied to *users* - banks and similar institutions can easily handle that).

It was interesting to hear people's responses to this question. For example, Mike Hearn basically brushed it off with "they're just dumb" or some flavor thereof, and also pointed out that a bank he had somewhere (California, Switzerland, I forget) actually did offer digital signing. I researched and found one bank in India that claimed to do it but didn't. By chance, a bank in Europe I was using, a year or two later, claimed to offer it *for the users*, and asked me to input my gpg key, which I did, but they never followed up with any functionality at all.

In retrospect I still think my original line of thinking was correct: it didn't pass the lawyers. The most crucial thing about modern digital signatures is their *transferrability*. This means that once a bank signs something, like a statement of account, it can be spread anywhere and is guaranteed to be authentic. This is astoundingly useful *to the bank's clients* but to the bank itself it only represents a liability if they get caught equivocating somehow. Notice how signatures would be useful to the bank at the level of actual transactions (e.g. swift transfers with their peers), but clients are not in the position of actually *transacting* at an equal level; they're just creditors. It's a little like a recent experience of cancelling a UK phone contract: I went through a phone process to cancel it then got charged a bill again; feeling irate, I wanted an email so I could have a record of the conversation I had with their customer service; but they don't offer any email address at all. Only phone or ephemeral chat windows. Same basic thing.