For notes, I mean.
Does Damus support onion addresses yet? #[0]
I like DLCs a lot. But I don’t see how they can stand in place of covenants. What is far away for BIP119?
This one I have to disagree with. I’ve mentioned this several times because I really want to get at the truth to the claim that it isn’t Turing complete. I’ve done my own thinking on the matter and concluded that it must be Turing complete. I think the reason for the debate is a matter of nitpicking. I know bitcoin script is not Turing complete because it doesn’t have loops nor recursion of any kind. However, across multiple transactions, one can achieve recursion on a script! That’s what makes Bitcoin Turing complete; it’s not just the script. I find this aspect fascinating.
I was excited for BIP119 because it would introduce covenants which are key to achieving this recursion. Though, the only difference with being able to do recursion on BTC is that processing time would be take time because of the limited block size. The program could live in the mempool for a considerable amount of time.
Anyway, that’s what I understand. If you have some insights to share, I’m all ears.
Thanks for the reply.
I know it's young, and I'm only interested in being involved in some discussion/development.
I understand read access doesn't risk the user's profile. But my point is about securing a user's account when using a client with write access. This is important, and my suggestion is just one idea. I'm interested in what has already been discussed so far.
lnbc29535650p1p3m5dlrpp50zxvkw3kek5pm2jjsv7dpks0z8thvz00uygwv87wddjqfcmgezkqdqcf4skkefqd96zqarjd93kkmr9cqpjsp5nk02p2ravzp4sj9ksxepdt6v5kkvp9r92gu5t223em4rspu53lus9q7sqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqsqqqqqysgqmqz9gxqyjw5qrzjqwryaup9lh50kkranzgcdnn2fgvx390wgj5jd07rwr3vxeje0glcllaqfy6thujwl5qqqqlgqqqqqeqqjqm4gcsa4km2vhwv8ydsww2fx0h95n4w02mlesdpfhe8vapfungu4p3eudy62ycf2f5nsa0lgr52mgt2q7zmm5042fl3hn5e5lpm6pe0gqmya47l
I see. What clients support changing profile pics?