reminds me of when the 'chip shops' here started hiring 'Potato Technicians' ....

It would be good to hear an episode dedicated to the critiques and potential pitfalls of activating covenants.

the benefits sound good, but in just the same way that nobody foresaw the rise of Ordinals, as a byproduct of taproot activation, it seems fitting that we should at least spend some time, thinking deeply about the other side of the covenant activation coin....

#TheMoreWeKnow

nostr:note16a6l7vqaukv62p566yfyes28m9sv3u3yj0wsj5afnf5v7u8vmt3q9kefkh

I can picture them now... logging on to mempool.space, to see if it went through...

This is somewhat of a weak spot, in my mind...

Consider a contraversial update to Bitcoin Core, about which many node runners are on the fence, with respect to upgrading...

All it would take would be for a fake-news headline, claiming there to be a vulnerability (that didn't actually exist), and a large swath of on-the-fence users would panic-upgrade, to the contraversial latest release....

This is actually a concern, in some respects.

To a certain extent the ETF is functioning like a second layer. However, in this case, unlike Lightning, no initial on chain transaction is required, to bootstrap oneself onto the layer.

The more liquidity held and transacted in this type of fee-less layer, the more miners miss out on transaction fees.

Yes, ETF product managers will have to make on chain transactions to balance their assets, but realisitically this could be done with a single on chain transaction per day/week/month.

I am not yet sure where the sweet spot is, in terms of alleviating fee pressure, and maintaining mining profitability.

Hopefully, the market will figure it out.

nostr:npub16c0nh3dnadzqpm76uctf5hqhe2lny344zsmpm6feee9p5rdxaa9q586nvr is it just me, or did primal.net just get a lot quicker ?

Scenario: a node runner decides not to upgrade to the latest version of Bitcoin Core, due to a controversial change in consensus logic.

A vulnerability is discovered, affecting all versions of Bitcoin Core, and a hotfix is published as a minor release, on top of the most recent version.

Question: What options are available to the node runner, to patch his older version of Bitcoin Core, so as to secure it against the vulnerability, without also upgrading to the controversial / most recent version?

Are there any more user friendly options, besides manually merging the hotfix, and rebuilding the old version from source?

#bitcoin #asknostr

nostr:npub1jan3xfrvxmd35smylytmnp3ne0sgqh2x47yq766s55zaf6eja4rselx52y is it possible we might one day see an Aqua wallet, secured with hardware, like the Blockstream Jade?

pegging in and out of Liquid might be a possibility

wait till he hears about e-cash...

they couldn't have made more of a hash of the approval process, if they tried...

Sad that he's no longer with us, to see things playing out, almost completely in line with what he had envisaged, back when he was 'running bitcoin'.

hats off to the pioneers.

they couldn't have made more of a hash of this approval if they tried...

This should be the default. Just like the transient nature of regular conversation.

Notes that last forever should be opt-in.

Elon should check the access logs...

npub13gwdzauxe7prqdy0jddar4m64jxt8efhsude7dn8efyzxekc2cfsnavqfk

by the looks of it he's made sure to dig about 5,000 decoys, strategically scattered across the rest of the country.....

Give the man peace... he's clearly in the middle of securing his 12 word seed....

Configure a Linksys router to act as a WiFi hotspot, using DD-WRT.

Attach any device capable of running a relay to the router, via ethernet.

Configure your WiFi hotspot to present a Lightning QR to unauthenticated clients.

Earn sats for providing relay access over WiFi.

Bonus points for providing WiFi clients open internet access, proxied over Tor, behind the scenes....