v0.11.0 of the #coldcard interface in Rust has been released. Support for Miniscript has been added.
Legacy finance imploding, people escaping into Bitcoin because it's the most liquid thing and you can self custody it at almost no cost. You love to see it.
The Coldcard wallet will be able to do Nostr signing in hardware once Schnorr is in. I think it's something worth looking into. #[3]​should have more details.
Grab an entry level tutorial for an easy language like Python. See if you're grokking it or not. Some people have the best intentions but they just can't figure it out. You won't know until you try.
Sorry, I'm not aware of anyone working on that.
I'm personally working on a Compact Block Filters (BIP157) client in Rust. Too many wallets rely on centralized backends or require complicated setups where you have to run a full node if you want to be private (most plebs can't/won't do it).
If you're a cypherpunk, you need to write code. There's just no way around it. Ideas won't implement themselves, no matter how cool they are.
If you can't write code and you're into privacy, consider funding or promoting useful projects and their devs.
Whirlpool may be slower than competitors to get the same anonset but the slowness is a feature because it introduces Sybil resistance.
Version 0.6 of Peerlink has been released. Peerlink is a networking library for building nodes and other Bitcoin p2p applications in Rust.
What happens to sub-5000 sat inputs? Can't register them?
The future is sovereign entities using fedimints internally and on-chain for interjurisdictional settlements between the mints.
Has that number been updated recently? I remember it being 0.1.
I stopped using Wasabi after the entity running both the coordinator and the wallet partnered with nefarious actors, so my numbers here may not be up to date.
That's a valid point, but the cost is really time then, not money. And it's what allows it to beat Wasabi in terms of pricing.
Unless you end up with slightly less than 0.1 BTC. In which case you have a large amount of toxic change that you can't do anything with.
I think you misunderstand the Whirlpool model. Only new entrants pay mining fees. Remixers ride free forever both in terms of coordinator fees and mining fees. It doesn't matter if it's your first remix or your 1000th. It's virtually free *in the long run*, not on a one off basis obviously. That's just math.
If I have a UTXO and I want to raise its anonset to 1000, which is cheaper: Wasabi which will probably require me to do 20 rounds and charge me for each, or Whirlpool which will require 200 rounds but charge only for the first one?
Strictly speaking Wasabi is worse because of the peeling model.
"Additionally Wasabi outputs are in the order in which they are registered". Has this been fixed?
https://twitter.com/ODELL/status/1151882688053334016
Maybe #[9]​ wants to chime in.
Whirlpool fees tend to zero in the long run. The "pay once mix forever" model rewards building high anonymity sets by making it virtually free per anonset the more rounds you participate in. Wasabi fees look like a ripoff in comparison.
That's not at all what we were talking about. We were talking about pointing Wasabi at different coordinators because someone may not like your Chainalysis partnership. Now you're talking about spinning up your own coordinator using a 3rd party tool. That's completely unrelated to using the same Wasabi binary with a different coordinator.
I am thoroughly confused as to why you suddenly changed topics.
Until Wasabi adds a text input that allows casual users to point the wallet at a different WabiSabi coordinator, they're just playing shell games and the coordinator isn't really a separate entity from the wallet. Pretending it is doesn't change anything.
Wasabi blacklists UTXOs in partnership with Chainalysis. That alone should be enough for a rational actor to stay away from such software.
The recent removal of Damus from the Apple AppStore in Hong Kong isn't necessarily a political problem.
Apple created a phone experience so slick that their market share is simply too big and people ultimately don't care about being walled in as long as the experience is smooth.
The root of the problem is:
1) no one else seems to be able to create a comparable phone experience (Android is junk unfortunately),
2) open source / privacy community has tried it several times with Linux etc. but it never works out due to how much money is needed to build a good device.
If the barrier to entry into the phone market was lower, we'd have more competition and less shenanigans like walled gardens. The state could still regulate app stores using traditional legislation but sideloading an alternate app store solves that problem.
TLDR: building a good phone that people like is still expensive and hard.