When I hear wallet devs like Ledger know exactly what their customers are doing I know to stay away
30% at most
Has anyone found a bank and/or credit card company that doesn’t require SMS for 2FA? I am constantly asking everyone I know, and would switch tomorrow if I found one.
It’s a cuck answer but just taking every tax deduction possible and understanding the big ones can make a huge difference. 🤷
I will never prepay anything unless it’s to support a Bitcoin, freedom tech, or other small business as a purely emotional decision.
If* you are a single issue US voter around Bitcoin, Freedom tech, and/or freeing Ross I think the optimal US presidential vote is RFK if you’re in a deep blue state and Trump if you’re in a red or swing state.
*not telling you to be, just interesting to theorize about
Harvard just sent out to the alumni a big change to their public communications policy:
…that “[t]he university and its leaders should not . . . issue official statements about public matters that do not directly affect the university’s core function” as an academic institution.
Love mutiny, thanks for your work
Despite tons of workshops and a 6+ BTC bounty there haven’t been any bug reports.
This the the Treasury is raising the forecast for the interest they have to pay on the debt. Theyve been arguably very optimistic and are now being forced to reconsider as interest rates remain higher for longer
Per Forbes:
"We’ve raised the interest-rate forecast," Yellen told Bloomberg on the sidelines of a Group of Seven meeting for finance ministers and central bank governors in Italy. "That does make a difference. It makes it somewhat more challenging to keep deficits and interest expense under control."
I think push to the limits and then discuss change is a rational anti-scalability fork for now position for sure. I just fear when people say no changes forever. That’ll kill Bitcoin. 🫡
That’s okay. Genuine question not a rude gotcha attempt: would you ever consider a scalability fork? Let’s say Bitcoin swallows everything in 20 years and demand is so off the charts a base chain transaction is $1000 each or maybe even $10,000 or more all the time in today’s dollars, would you consider then or still a no? If not why?
Depends on your definition of shitcoin. If you are referring to things actually in production such as tokens, ordinals, and inscriptions that is inaccurate. These generally use Segwit not Taproot, and even if we somehow could remove Segwit and Taproot you can still do inscriptions. If you are referring to potential future state theorized taproot specific functionality such as Optimistic Rollups on BitVM, those are still only theorized possibilities and may never happen. So the proverbial jury is still out. And even if they do technically work they will not be very efficient or “ideal” so even if technically viable they may never gain users. Hard to say without a lot more time and data.
It certainly is possible but it’s also not that simple. Any fork cannot be a 100% security or say a 100% scaling fork. They aren’t so black and white.
It’s fine if you don’t like one particular fork option, but keep in mind without certain forks Bitcoin will 100% die. The Unix timestamp is the classic example. So being 100% anti fork is factually 100% wanting Bitcoin to die.
Wise has the highest interest rate of any bank account I can find in the US(with decent digital features), 4.85%. They hate crypto so only use it that doesn’t bother you. Maybe great for folks who still want a rainy day fiat fund in a traditional bank. I recognize not everyone will do the “get on zero” lifestyle.
Correct, CTV is a net new op code soft fork.
The Blocksize Wars taught us it’s unlikely to help. All the big money and companies were on the size of a big blocks hard fork and they still failed.
That’s not to encourage complacency. How the small blockers won was educating, speaking out, advocating, etc.
If you think it will break things just don’t run their software
This statement is factually and easily provably incorrect. You should read the blocksize wars. No one can force you to run software. All developers can do is write software. Everyone has to choose what they want to run and it takes a super majority to change the network.
This is the correct take. Let’s all just take the win.
I’m eyeballing the timeline not rewatching so excuse a rough estimate: at like 120 he says”just don’t F with the protocol, and around 127 he says “don’t inflate the network” and goes on to define inflation as adding scalability and features. So no scalability and no features or any kind should be added. Saying we cannot make any attempt to scale is ridiculous. This means Bitcoin is only for rich people and 99% of the world it’s just pick your custodian.
Unix timestamp issue, multiple unaddressed DOS vectors, suboptimal package relay, etc. could go on but there are many bugs that need to be addressed. Without it Bitcoin will literally cease to operate eventually. This is fact, not hyperbole.
That is factually not his mindset. He said explicitly “no protocol changes”. That isn’t cautious thats refusal to do anything at all, and Bitcoin has multiple bugs we need to address.
Highly recommend watching. Addressing what development and changes he does or doesn’t support and how it should or shouldn’t be funded. Got out the key points on these topics into the open.
nostr:npub14mcddvsjsflnhgw7vxykz0ndfqj0rq04v7cjq5nnc95ftld0pv3shcfrlx thank you and massive credit for asking and pushing Saylor on hard questions everyone else was too chickenshit to do so. This is very important for the #Bitcoin community.