I love that one. They’re trying to tell us this is a hate symbol now?

One of the best answers I ever heard about #Bitcoin was someone who asked a hardcore bitcoiner, “You only talk about all of these great benefits, but what is the worst thing about Bitcoin?”

His answer was, “It’s going to grant all those same freedoms and benefits to the person who you hate most in the world. And there’s nothing you can do about it.”

Ironically, that’s what most people can’t give up. They can’t let go of the statist temptation of arbitrarily punishing people they don’t like, or are afraid of. nostr:note1wxevegymwd4vscqu3urkqsx4qsuma9qphkdhk9amru3pdr77fjxsdsc0xr

I see nothing but bitcoin orange on the horizon.

Gophers vs USC.

Really enjoyed Joker 2, only to come home and find out the entire internet hates it 😫

Thank you very much for the thoughtful reply. Had a feeling it was rather spread out, so this will help point me in the right direction. Wish me luck

Despite having me blocked, Craig gets sufficiently triggered by my post to spin up his own 9 post long thread, powered by ChatGPT, where he rages pathetically and delusionally from some closet in Asia where he is on the run from consequences for his long, scammy cosplay as Satoshi.

Love to see it. 😘

Re: the 55MB file generic/custom: it comes from parsing the taproot-only utxo set at a particular block height (you see that in the filename). It's a list of curve points, each one of them is basically P + vJ where P is the taproot pubkey of the utxo and v is the value in satoshis of the utxo. It's also filtered with minimum value to prevent being too large. Also it should be half that size (and that's one of the largest I've seen so far) because I never bothered to change it from hex to binary.

The processing takes time: yes, this pre-processing step, which reads in and modifies the curve points, is currently more friction than we'd like. That one took 4 minutes for a 440K key set. For some applications it might be fine to have this setup, then run a daemon in the background so that you can keep verifying instantly, but for this one, maybe not. Farming this out to others, I'm not sure if there's a way to do that that's more interesting than have the "other" do the whole verification. Maybe? Also, it *might* be possible to have the proof size be larger (e.g. 1MB instead of 10kb) and then the verifier only needs the tree root, but it's a significantly different algorithm and I'm not sure about if/how that would work.

The range: the range here was a from a chosen minimum of 1 million sats to a maximum of 1 million + 2^18. The minimum is completely prover choice. The range being a power of 2 is because ZKPs of range are most efficiently done as "prove that the number has the following bit representation", hence a power of 2. My feeling is that k+2^n is flexible *enough* but with some extra machinery you could make it more flexible (you can also change the base from 2 to 3 or whatever, but that doesn't help a ton I think).

Window for cheating: as above it's a utxo snapshot at a certain block. It isn't valid for any other time. So frequency of checks can't be that fast. Now I think about it, that is a big drawback here, if you want real time checking.

I'm not sure what your "custom to the prover" sentence was really asking. As per above ,the keyset/snapshot is generic for everyone, it's a snapshot of a blockheight. The prover and verifier have to agree on: the block height, and the minimum value filter, so that they have the same keyset file. If you try to verify a proof with a different keyset it just doesn't verify, even if the utxo is shared between the two conflicting keysets, because it's a tree like a merkle tree, and the roots won't match.

ELECTRONIC RESISTANCE.

Why does Trump need a fake tan?

Shouldn't someone who golfs as much as him have no trouble acquiring a natural tan?

gM?

Depopulation

Your mobile phone service provider (ie Verizon, at&t or whoever) knows your location and can see (and *will* sell the metadata of) your data traffic, just like your home ISP does. VPN allows only the VPN provider to see it

testing my private nostr relay

Do you really need a VPN?

Basics recap for consumer VPNs:

1. Not everyone needs a VPN. It depends on your threat model / jurisdiction you live in / expectations around privacy. You need to understand the extent of protection they provide to assess that.

2. Despite what most VPN providers will tell you in their marketing speak, using a VPN alone will be ineffective or useless for:

- Achieving anonymity or "perfect privacy"

- Preventing tech corporations from profiling you

- Protecting your passwords

- Hiding your mobile phone location

- Providing better security when working from home

3. Trustworthy VPNs can be effective at:

- Encrypting your data and DNS requests so your ISP or mobile network operator cannot monitor or log your online activity

- Masking your IP address from websites and servers you connect to

- Circumventing censorship or geo blocks

- Increasing your security on untrusted public networks by preventing MITM attacks (not common)

If you see claims from a VPN provider contrary to any of the points above, they are either lying to you or are incompetent. 95% of them won't pass this test.