nostr:npub126yeu6j4c9rhrfz63r9ep2qzvgaquvs3ag2ywpt79jv8z7tvu47qkx6r3n #subscribe

Coinjoin implementation using nostr: https://gitlab.com/1440000bytes/joinstr

Slides from recent presentation in plebfi: https://cryptpad.fr/slide/#/2/slide/view/LVR2PgS0Yy8g526AVlytOPiGM5vzg26sq0dFxF2VbC4/embed/present/

Spammy solution. I think there were better solutions suggested as NIPs in nostr NIP repo.

How did you create the graph?

There are 2 in this medium post: https://medium.com/@bobbyrsec/the-dangers-of-googles-zip-tld-5e1e675e59a5

nostr:npub1gcxzte5zlkncx26j68ez60fzkvtkm9e0vrwdcvsjakxf9mu9qewqlfnj5z

URLs with U+2044 (⁄), U+2215 (∕) and @ in them should not be printed as a link in amethyst. A warning could be added or normal text with no hyperlink.

Testing an issue with .zip domains based on https://medium.com/@bobbyrsec/the-dangers-of-googles-zip-tld-5e1e675e59a5

https://github.com∕kubernetes∕kubernetes∕archive∕refs∕tags∕@v1271.zip

`git cherry`

There should be a recording. Not sure when will it be shared by organizers.

Link to my slides for plebfi presentation: https://cryptpad.fr/slide/#/2/slide/view/LVR2PgS0Yy8g526AVlytOPiGM5vzg26sq0dFxF2VbC4/embed/present/

nostr:npub12s5jvjpmulyx3csf87rszp3udjkcnvgh40trv3ywlu737sq4xj9q07t6jr

Feel free to ask questions

Hmmm

I think Andrew Chow and others wanted `joinpsbts` to just add all the outputs from different PSBTs in a new PSBT provided they have different inputs.

`combinepsbt` RPC is used avoid duplicates but it requires all PSBTs to have same inputs and outputs.

Maybe nobody felt the need of something in between that takes different inputs, join them and combine outputs avoiding duplicates.

Not sure. Although if there are any reasons, it could remain the same by default and only remove duplicate outputs if an argument is set to `true` in `joinpsbts` RPC command.

We can change it at least on our node, compile with this patch and use it if it works as expected after testing :)

Goal is to write a python script that could sign a bitcoin transaction itself and private key isn't leaked.

- User runs this script on machine, gets a new address, sends some bitcoin and a new address, script sends bitcoin back to user's address

- User doesn't know private key that was used by script to sign the transaction

Is it safe to encrypt the private key, store it in a variable and decrypt when required?

Or this approach is vulnerable?

Nostr in plebfi: https://pleb.fi/miami2023/