James O'Beirne has the best takes:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JathbmXKwVg
Except for wanting bigger blocks: we actually need smaller blocks and Drivechain. He is also wrong about Nostr being awful. But aside from these two he is great on everything.
Thanks FJ, means a lot!
Is there a way to post from primal.net without giving them my private key? Nostr PSBT or something?
Just recovered my nsec from an ancient version of gossip.
You guys figure out subkeys yet?
What's the right name for this dish? I've been calling it "bachelor's surprise" all my adult life
I watched a talk from Cody Wilson the other day that has made me reorient spiritually a little bit. It's called "Death Athletic." It's a good articulation of the sentimental quandary we are in: the combination of "I know I'm fucked" but also "I can't give up because there is a higher purpo
se, and I will not be made miserable." He pulls some pretty good philosophical references throuhgout, and mentions Christ and Socrates as an example of inverting "this is being done to me" as "this is all according to plan." https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LVi9m65lHGc
Sure thing, good questions.
) Package relay and ephemeral anchors complement OP_VAULT, but don't replace it. They're about relay policy and how transactions can be replaced in the mempool, but they don't enforce any kind of new on-chain script rules. Sadly you just can't do vault stuff without allowing "tighter" rules on script validation with certain new opcodes, which is all a soft fork is.
2) UASF from a code standpoint is not really any harder than any activation method, but IMO it should be a last resort. The point of "traditional" activation methods like BIP8/9/speedtrial is not to ask miner approval, it is to help coordinate the upgrade with miners so that there isn't some portion of hashrate that might mine blocks that are invalid with the new rule set and cause a disrputive chainsplit. Whether or not this winds up being a UASF isn't something I would decide.
In four years we'll have libbitcoinkernel and Core won't be such a bottleneck ;)
Hey thanks! Yeah regrettable we can't do this stuff on chain without a softfork. But I think bomb-proof custody is an essential enough use case to justify it.
Ironic to me that the mobile experience on nostr is so far ahead of the desktop equivalent. Mobile is a captured platform; it's bad for our minds and our privacy. We should get off it to the extent possible.
Feel same about bitcoin, but not about work on Core. I'm glad you're not fatigued like me!
I made a quick screencast demoing OP_VAULT (BIP-345) with a little prototype wallet I've written in the last few days https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7Zwm5iHFyBQ
I talk about it a bit in the second half of the conversation here: https://tftc.io/tftc-podcast/388-op_vault-and-bitcoin-governance-james-obeirne/
It's a long and pretty boring conversation, and nobody's fault per se. But the phrase "tyranny of structurelessness" comes to mind. Incentives on the development side are not really aligned for longterm success IMO. Bitcoin's project structure is very much an experiment; basically every other major opensource effort has clear leadership structure (if not a BDFL). In bitcoin this would obviously be An Issue (unless there were multiple competing implementations), but the sclerotic and meandering development cycle demotivates talented devs all the same. I've spent five years working on a project that, in commercial settings, would have been merged within a month. It just gets really old.
Complete OP_VAULT prototype/demo wallet almost finished. Gonna record a screencast
in the next few days.
If the pay wasn't good, I absolutely would not be working on Bitcoin Core. It is a miserable project.
