Honestly though, windows 3.1 and 95 interface was great. So satisfying to click the buttons, and those windows look like solid buildings, not like the fiat architecture of today 😄

Does anyone know if anyone has done an implementation of secq [*] in code? I'm pretty sure not, but asking just in case.

I can ( and probably will) just do it in python (literally just swap p and N), it'll let me play with algos but 100% useless for anything real. Needs optimised algorithms, even if you ignored constant time implementation.

[*] secq256k1 is a kind of 'mirror' version of the secp256k1 that we use in bitcoin. The curve group order of secq is the finite field order of secp and vice versa. It's some kind of very deep fact that such 'mirror pairs' of elliptic curves of prime order are much more common than you would expect by chance. Why care? It makes something similar to merkle trees be possible using curve points, which is remarkably powerful.

Interesting thought, but I'd say such superposition already exists.

If there is no CT, there is still no mapping between sats in each input and sats in each output. (Because satoshis don't exist, any more than an inch 'exists'). Unambiguous mapping of input to output only exists for 1 in 1 out.

Any other interpretation like FIFO is just something an observer makes up. Not just that, but it clearly has zero correlation with actual chains of ownership.

It's true that CT makes this arbitrary assignation either impossible or much harder. You could still do it by publically sharing info (which is verifiable). It would be stupid, of course, because you could just choose to not use CT.

nostr:nevent1qqs8735gevauguff55zapujsn73rpjdkhzly9us9a7u4p0yyp6jwv0cpzpmhxue69uhkummnw3ezuamfdejsygqyey2a4mlw8qchlfe5g39vacus4qnflevppv3yre0xm56rm7lveypsgqqqqqqs6hqqap

Un poquito mejor cada día 😄

But, guessing what prompts the question, I think a bitdevs in Spanish would be a great idea, here. Even though there's definitely space for this one in English too, since we have somewhat of a burgeoning technical/international community. Having people split between the capital and El Zonte is a bit of a pain though.

I love how profoundly this is wrong in 2 distinct ways 😄

The worker reuses the skill for 10++ years ... obviously each buyer does not pay for 10 years of training.

And a really important principle: you don't pay someone to compensate their costs in producing, you pay for the value you receive. The former results in a world full of incompetence, resulting in suffering on a massive scale.

Oof. This is not a great idea imo.

https://adoptingelsalvador.gob.sv/welcome

To get the 'freedom visa' and passport, they are telling you (papered over with a lot of nice language) that you will be given citizenship if you hand over $1M. They actually use the word 'contribution' - it may say 'investment' but they mean their investment in ES's future, not as in you get the principal back, or any income stream.

This is a lot worse, economically, than other golden visa type programs, at least as far as I remember. Sometimes they're very high numbers (like this one), sometimes they're payment and not investment... but both, oof.

Anyone remember 3BTC *investment* for citizenship? Maybe I just imagined it 😄

If there was a "we" that could choose to allow this or not, it would just perpetuate the same problem.

I agree it's a problem. It's not going away quickly. Bitcoin metamorphosising in response to it is inevitable.

I sometimes forget we have a whole generation of bitcoiners who weren't around for this pre-blocksize wars stuff ... there were basically 3 big dramas around mining back in that era. This one (Luke's censorship, and more generally the controversy around satoshi dice), the ghash.io 50% drama, and the butterfly labs '2 weeks' delivery.

I mean OK there were probably 10 others I don't remember 😄

I'm not including the OP_RETURN drama, it kinda overlaps I guess

Program code is data. You cannot control how people interpret it.

Isn't the fundamental issue here, the witness discount? Apart from that i can't see anything else worthy of discussion. If people are prepared to pay for data encoded in txs, they will always be able to - even in the most disruptive way - see 'Stamps'. I can't see any ethical basis to tell them they can't, nor any technical way to prevent it.

We had our first 'bitdevs' meetup in el salvador yesterdey, organized by nicolas burtey of galoy.

I think it went very well. Mostly talked about recent mining news.

bitdevelsalvador.com

Agree, makes a lot of sense. Great idea!

Is anyone else using SV2 yet? (Not a rhetorical Q, I vaguely recall reading someone saying they were using it, but I forgot where).

Sure. Not like it's a negative to do stuff like stratum v2 and just, have other viable pools trying to do it better

Stratum v2 is great, but I wonder if it really makes any sense to operate a pool as a company in the US (like Ocean) and expect that you will avoid attack from the authorities (wrt kyc and censorship). Custody arguments will probably not convince the thugs.

I've always found the concept of pools a bit bewildering - shares are cool in a non adversarial environment but 'block withholding attacks' - is it really an attack if your house is made out of paper, and the wind picks up?

If you solve that attack, there will be 10 others.

Easy for me to wisecrack but tbh i don't have solutions.

I still occasionally get thank you messages from students watching maths teaching videos I made *11 years ago*. We take it for granted just how absurdly powerful the multiplying effect the internet has had on the world.

The videos aren't even good (quality is terrible), but if you address things that are actually useful to an audience, even as little as sub 1K people, the leverage that the world gets from even a mild effort, is amazing.

To 'gain a new territory', rather than fighting on theirs, might be an idea. I'm pretty sure someone notable used that phrase, a while back ;)

This is really about Chaumian mints rather than federations in particular, right.

Something I find really interesting is, to the extent your point is true, it's also ~ the reason that these servers aren't auditable, which might be the thing that takes them from 'a bit dodgy' to 'really dubious trust model', and therefore, perhaps, why they will struggle to find usage.

That's bitcoin's special sauce, scantxoutset and so on.

Amazing news. Do you have a clear concept yet of how that translates to applications like 2WPs yet, given that bitvm is currently a challenge response game between 2 participants, or are there still some gaps to fill in?

Unlinkably shuffle then consolidate, yes, sure but i think maybe it doesn't end there.

I'm strongly reminded of how wabisabi works. With wabisabi, you can get blinded credentials on amounts, which can be split or combined, they're 'algebraic' commitments. So that's along the lines of what you say here.

I feel like the tricky part is user verification at the end. Alice sees an output to Bob of 3btc, she's paying him 2btc, i guess it's ok fir her to use greater than or equal to?

Maybe this is never discussed because it's not realistically going to happen?

Oh thanks, that's pretty objective! Looks like it came out a few months ago? So the reports i heard about them having 0btc a year ago were just nonsense.